Comprehension

COMPREHENSION

A comprehension exercise consists of a passage, upon which questions are set to test the student's ability to understand the content of the given text and to infer information and meanings from it.

Here are a few hints:-

Read the passage fairly quickly to get the general idea.

Read again, a little slowly, so as to know the details.

Study the questions thoroughly. Turn to the relevant portions of the passage, read them again, and then rewrite them in your own words, neatly and precisely

Use complete sentences.

If you are asked to give the meaning of any words or phrases, you should express the idea as clearly as possible in your own words. Certain words require the kind of definition that is given in a dictionary. Take care to frame the definition in conformity with the part of speech.

SPECIMEN

Read the passage below and then answer the questions which follow it.

It has been part of Nelson's prayer that the British fleet might be distinguished by humanity in the victory which he expected. Setting an example himself, he twice gave orders to cease firing upon the Redoubtable, supposing that she had struck because her great guns were silent; for as she carried no flag, there was no means of mstantly ascertaining the fact. From this ship, which he had thus twice spared, he received his death. A ball fired from her mizzen-top which, in the then situation of the two vessels

was not more than fifteen yards from that part of the deck where he was standing, struck the epaulette on his left shoulder about a quarter after one, just in the heat of action. He fell upon his face on the spot which was covered with his poor secretary's blood. Hardy who was a few steps from him turning round, saw three men raising him up. “They have done for me at last Hardy !” said he. “I hope not !” cried

Hardy. “Yes,” he replied; “my backbone is shot through !” Yet even now not for a moment losing his presence of mind, he observed as they were carrying him down the ladder, that the tiller-ropes which had been shot away, were not yet replaced and ordered that new ones should be roped immediately. Then that he might not be seen by the crew, he took out his handkerchief and covered his face and his stars. Had he but concealed these badges of honour from the enemy, England perhaps would not have had cause to receive with sorrow the news of the battle of Trafalgar. The cockpit was crowded with wounded and dying men; over whose bodies he was with some difficulty conveyed, and laid upon a pallet in the midshipmen's berth. It was soon perceived, upon examination, that the wound was mortal. This, however, was concealed from all, except Captain Hardy, the chaplain, and the medical attendants. He himself being certain, from the sensation in his back, and the gush of blood he felt momently within his breast, that no human care could avail him, insisted that the surgeon should leave him and attend to those to whom he might be useful.

Questions

What is meant by 'supposing that she had struck’?

How can Nelson be said to have been partly responsible for his own death?

What do you understand by the 'mizzen-top' ?

Why did Nelson insist that the surgeon should leave him and attend to others?

What qualities in Nelson's character are revealed by this passage?

Answers

'Supposing that she had struck means 'thinking that the men in the ship had surrendered'.

Nelson ordered his men two times to cease firing on the Redoubtable. From the same ship a ball was fired at him and brought about his death. He was thus partly responsible for his death.

The 'mizzen-top' is the platform round the lower part of the mast nearest the stern.

Nelson was certain that it would be impossible to save his life. He, there fore, insisted that the surgeon should leave him and attend to others.

His patriotism, his humanity and his powers of endurance are revealed by this passage.

Exercise

Read the passages carefully and answer briefly the questions appended below:-

People talk of memorials to him in statues of bronze or marble or pillars and thus they mock him and belie his message. What tribute shall we pay to him that he would have appreciated ? He has shown us the way to live and the way to die and if we have not understood that lesson, it would be better that we raised no memorial to him, forthe only

fit memorial is to follow reverently in the path he showed us and to do our duty in life and in death.

He was a Hindu and an Indian, the greatest in many generations, and he was proud of being a Hindu and an Indian, to-him India was dear, because she had represented throughout the age's certain immutable truths. But though he was intensely religious and came to be called the Father of the Nation which he had liberated, yet no narrow religious or national bonds confined his spirit. And so he became the great internationalist, believing in the essential unity of man, the underlying unity of all religions, and he needs of humanity, and more specially devoting himself to the service of the poor, the distressed and the oppressed millions everywhere.

His death brought more tributes than have been paid at the passing of any other human being in history. Perhaps what would have pleased him best was the spontaneous tributes that came from the people of Pakistan. On the morrow of the tragedy, all of us forgot for a while the bitterness that had crept in, the estrangement and conflict of these past months and Gandhiji stood out as the beloved champion and leader of the people of India, of india as it was before partition cut up this living nation.

What was his great power over the mind and heart of man due to ? Even we realize, that his dominating passion was truth. That truth led him to proclaim without ceasing that good ends can never be attained by evil methods, that the end itself is distorted if the method pursued is bad. That truth led him to confess publicly whenever he thought he had made a mistake - Himalayan errors he called some of his own mistakes. That truth led him to fight evil and untruth wherever he found them, regardless of the consequences. That truth made the service of the poor and the dispossessed the passion of his life, for where there is inequality and discrimination and suppression there is injustice and evil and untruth. And thus he became the beloved of all those who have suffered from social and political evils, and the great representative of humanity as it should be. Because of that truth in him wherever he sat became a temple and where he trod was hallowed ground.

-Jawaharlal Nehru

Questions

About whom is the passage written?

Why does Nehru make the difference about being a "Hindu" and an "Indian"? Is there any difference really?

What great lesson did this great man show us for life?

Mention some of the virtues of "the great internationalist."

Nehru seems to suggest that his hero was "the beloved champion and leader of the people of India" only before the partition of Pakistan and India.' Do you agree with that? Explain.

What did "truth" mean to this great man ?

Give the meaning of the following : memorials, immutable; essential, estrangement, spontaneous, discrimination, dominating, Himalayan.

The Voice had to be listened to, not only on account of its form but for the matter which it delivered. It gave a message to the country that it needed greatly. It brought to the common people a realization of their duty to concern themselves with their affairs. The common, people were made to take an interest in the manner in which they were governed in the taxes they paid in the return they got from those taxes. This interest in public affairs - politics as you may call it - was to be the concern no longer of the highly educated few but of the many - the poor, the propertyless, the workingmen in town and country. Politics was not to be the concern of a small aristocracy of intellect property of the masses. And with the change in the subjects of politics that Voice bought about also a change in the objects of polities'. Till then politics had busied itself mainly with the machinery of Government towards making its personnel more and more native, with proposals for a better distribution of political power, with protests against the sins of omission and of commission of the administration. This Voice switched politics on to concern for the needs of the common people. The improvement of the lot of the poor was to be the main concern of politics and the politician. The improvement, especially of the lives of the people of the neglected villages, was to be Placed before Governments and political organizations as the goal of all political en deavour. The raising of the standard of living of the people of the villages, the finding of subsidiary occupations which would give the agricultural poor work for their enforced leisure during the off season and an addition to (heir exiguous income, the improvement of the housing of the poor, the sanitation, of the villages – these were to be the object-

tives to be kept in view. In the towns, the slums and cheries were to receive especial attention. There was especially a class of the poor for which that compassionate Voice pleaded and protested. This was for the so-called depressed class, the outcastes of Hindu society. The denial of elementary human rights to this class of people it considered the greatest blot on Hindu society and history. It raised itself in passionate protest against the age-old wrongs of this class and forced those that listened to it to endeavour to remove the most outrageous of them like untouchability. It caused a revolution in Hindu religious practice by having Hindu temples thrown open to these people. It made the care of them a religious duty of the Hindus by re-naming them Harijans. -Mr. Ruthnasami

Questions

Why had people to listen to "The Voice" of Mahatma Gandhi?

Why had people to take an interest in politics?

What was the change brought about in the objects of politics?

What improvements were made for the common man?

Explain:-

Sins of omission and of commission of the administration.

No longer the monopoly of the classes, but the property of the masses.

The next ingredient is a very remarkable one: Good Temper. “Love is not easily provoked”. Nothing could be more striking than to find this here. We are inclined to look upon bad temper as a very harmless weakness. We speak of it as a mere infirmity of nature, a family failing, a matter of temperament, not a thing to take into very serious account in estimating a man's character. And yet here, right in the heart of this analysis of love, it finds a place; and the Bible again and again returns to condemn it as one of the most destructive elements in human nature. The peculiarity of ill temper is that it is the vice of the virtuous. It is often the one blot on an otherwise noble character. You know men who are all but perfect, and women who would be entirely perfect, but for an easily ruffled quick-tempered or "touchy" disposition. This compatibility of ill temper with high moral character is one of the strangest and saddest problems of ethics. The truth is there are two great classes of sins-sins of the Body, and sins of Disposition. The Prodigal son may be taken as a type of the first, the Elder Brother of the second. Now society has no doubt whatever as to which of these is the worse. Its brand falls, without a challenge, upon the Prodigal. But are we right? We have no balance to weigh one another's sins, and coarser and finer are but human words; but faults in the higher nature may be less venial than those in the lower, and to the eye of Him who is Love, a sin against Love may seem a hundred times more base. No form of vice, not worldliness, not greed of gold, not drunkenness itself does more to un-christianise society than evil temper. For embittering life, for breaking up communities, for destroying the most sacred relationships, for devastating homes, for withering up men and women, for taking the bloom off childhood; in short for sheer gratuitous misery-producing power, this influence stands alone. Jealousy, anger, pride, uncharity, cruelty, self-righteous-ness, touchiness, doggedness,

sullenees - in varying proportions these are the ingredients of all ill temper. Judge if such sins of the disposition are not worse to live in. and for others to live with than sins of the body. There is really no place in Heaven for a disposition like this. A man with such a mood could only make Heaven miserable for all the people in it. -Henry Druromond

Questions

What is the popular notion about “bad temper”?

How is bad temper “the vice of the virtuous”?

Which class of sins is worse, and why – since of the body, since of the disposition ?

Mention some evils of bad temper.

Why according to the author will there be no place in Heaven for bad tempered folk?

Find words from the passage which mean; breaking up; running; scandalising; souring; easily or quickly offended.

Yes, there were giants before the Jam Sahib (the great Indian cricketer, Kumar Shree Ranjitsinhji, better known to the world of cricket as Ranji). And yet I think it is undeniable that as a batsman the Indian will live as the supreme exponent of the Englishman's game. The claim does not rest simply on his achievements although, judged by them, the claim could be sustained. His season's average of 87 with a total of over 3,000 runs, is easily the high-water mark of English cricket. Thrice he has totalled over 3,000 runs and no one else has equalled that record. And is not his the astonishing achievement of scoring two double centuries in a single match on a single day - not against a feeble attack, but against Yorkshire, always the most resolute and resourceful of bowling teams ?

But we do not judge a cricketer so much by the runs he gets as by the way he gets them.

"In literature as in finance," says Washington Irving, "much paper and much poverty may

co-exist." And in cricket too many runs and much dullness may be associated. If cricket

is menaced with creeping paralysis, it is because it is losing the spirit of joyous adventure

and becoming a mere instrument for compiling tables of averages. There are dull,

mechanic fellows who turn out runs with as little emotion as a machine turns out pins.

There is no colour, no enthusiasm, no character in their play. Cricket is not an adventure

to them; it is a business. It was so with Shrewsbury. His technical perfection was

astonishing; but the soul of the game was wanting in him. There was no sunshine in his

play, no swift surprise or splendid unselfishness. And without these things without gaiety,

daring, and the spirit of sacrifice cricket is a dead thing. Now, the Jam Sahib has the root

of the matter in him. His play is as sunny as his face. He is not a miser hoarding up runs,

but a millionaire spending them, with a splendid yet judicious prodigality. It is as though

his pockets are bursting with runs that he wants to shower with his blessings upon the

expectant multitude. It is not difficult to believe that in his litttle kingdom Nawangar

where he has power of life and death in his hands he is extremely popular for it is obvious

that his pleasure is in giving pleasure.

-A.G. Gardiner

Questions

1. Correct the following statistics, if necessary:-

His season's average of 87 with a total of over 3,000 runs is easily the high-water mark of English cricket.

Thrice he has totalled over 3,000 runs, and no one else has equaled that record.

He scored two double centuries in a single match on a single day.

2. "Many runs and much dullness may be .associated." Prove this.

Mention some reasons why cricket is losing its lustre.

What gives cricket its "character"?

How should real cricket be played ?

Describe in your own words the secret of the Jam Sahib's wizardry with the bat.

Make a list of “do’s” and “don’ts” for a promising cricketer.

Supposing you have to make a payment of Rs. 100, you can do so in rupee-coins; but it would be cumbersome to pay in nickel or copper coins, because they are heavy to carry and also because it takes much time to count them. The Government therefore permits you to make the payment in rupee-notes. What are these rupee-notes really? They are a kind of money, right enough, although they are made of paper instead of metal. You can use them in just the same way that you use ordinary money. The reason why they are made of paper and used is that they save the trouble of carrying metal coins about - of course, paper is lighter than metal and they also save using silver and other metals when they are scarce.

What makes these mere pieces of paper bear the value of the number of rupees that is printed upon them? Why should a piece of paper, with “100” printed on it be worth twenty times as much as a piece of paper with "five" printed on it - and also worth a hundred times as much as a silver rupee-coin? The reason is that Government guarantees that the piece of paper is worth the amount printed on it and promises to pay that amount to anybody who wishes to exchange this paper for the rupee-coins. Also, if you think about it you can easily realize that crores and crores more of rupee-coins would have to be minted, if all paper-money were abolished.

Perhaps you may ask, "Then why not have paper money only ? Why use silver and nickel and copper at all ?" The answer is - because money must as we have already said, be something so useful that everyone wants. Also because the metals are the best form of money; and thirdly because it would be impossible to print just the right amount of paper money that would keep prices at their proper natural level. If any Government prints too much paper money, then prices go up at once. The supply of money is increased and therefore its value (in food, clothes, books, houses, land, tools and everything else) goes down.

You may think at first that it is queer to talk of having too much paper money and that

money is so nice and useful that you cannot have too much of it. But if you think that, I

am afraid you are forgetting that money is only useful for what it will buy; so it is no

good at all having more money if there are no more things to buy with it. The more

money there is, the higher will be the prices of everything. The same thing happens with

rupee-coins as with paper money. But it is not likely to happen, for this reason : it is very

easy to print a great deal of paper money, but not at all easy to increase the amount of

rupee-coins. Silver has to be dug out of mines, and very difficult to get; so the amount

there is if it keeps very steady and changes very little. In fact that is one of the chief

reasons why it was chosen to make coins of.

-Ernest F. Row

Questions

Why does the Government allow payment to be made in paper notes?

What is more valuable, to have 100 rupee-coins in silver or a Rs. 100 note, in paper?

If metal is so cumbersome, why should we not have only paper money? Why should we not print as much of it as possible?

What is the real use of money?

Why should the prices of commodities go up when there is plenty of paper money?

Why does the Government print only a certain number of paper notes, and not as many as it likes arbitrarily?

You seemed at first to take no notice of your school-fellows, or rather to set yourself against them because they were strangers to you. They knew as little of you

as you did of them; so that this would have been the reason for their keeping aloof, from you as well, which you would have felt as a hardship. Learn never to conceive a

prejudice against other because you know nothing of them. It is bad reasoning, and makes enemies of half the world. Do not think ill of them till they behave ill to you; and then strive to avoid the faults which you see in them. This will disarm their hostility sooner than pique or resentment or complaint. I thought you were disposed to criticize the dress of some of the boys as not so good as your own. Never despise any one for anything that he cannot help - least of all, for his poverty. I would wish you to keep up appearances yourself as a defence against the idle sneers of the world, but I would not have you value yourself upon them. I hope you will neither be the dupe nor victim of vulgar prejudices. Instead of saying above "Never despise anyone for anything that he cannot help," I might have said, "Never despise anyone at all"; for contempt implies a triumph over and pleasure in the ill of another. It means that you are glad and congratulate yourself on their failings or misfortunes.You have hitherto been a spoilt child, and have been used to have your own way a good deal, both in the house and among your playfellows, with whom you were too fond of being a leader; but you have good nature and good sense, and will get the better of this in time. You have now got among other boys who are your equals, or bigger and stronger than yourself and who have something else to attend to besides humouring your whims and fancies, and you feel this as a repulse or piece of injustice. But the first lesson to learn is that there are other people in the world besides yourself. The more airs of childish self-importance you. give yourself, you will only expose yourself to be the more thwarted and laughed at. True equality is the only true morality or wisdom. Remember always that you are but one among others and you can hardly mistake your place in society. In your father's house you might do as you pleased; in the world you will find competitors at every turn. You are not born a king's son, to destroy or dictate to millions; you can only expect to share their fate, or settle your differences amicably with them. You already find

so al school, and I wish you to be reconciled to your situation as soon and with as little pain as you can.

- William Hazlitt

Questions

Can you tell who is writing to whom in this passage? What would you call this kind of writing - a speech, a diary, a letter, a sermon?

What reasons does the author give for not harbouring a prejudice against others?

What are some of the blessings of living with others in the same class or the same school?

Paraphrase:-

True equality is the only true morality or true wisdom.

To be the dupe or victim of vulgar prejudices.

Settle your differences amicably with them.

"Contempt implies a triumph over and pleasure in the ill of another." Who are those who feel like this and why ?

The author says that "in the world you will find competitors at every turn." But competition is a very good thing. Why does he seem to warn his son about it ?

Unquestionably a literary life is for the most part an unhappy life; because, if you have genius, you must suffer the penalty of genius; and, if you have only talent, there are so many cares and worries incidental to the circumstances of men of letters, as to make life exceedingly miserable. Besides the pangs of composition, and the continuous disappointment which a true artist feels at his inability to reveal himself, there is the ever-recurring difficulty of gaining the public ear. Young writers are buoyed

up by the hope and the belief that they have only to throw that poem at the world's feet to

get back in return the laurel-crown; that they have only to push that novel into print to be

acknowledged at once as a new light in literature. You can never convince a young author

that the editors of magazines and the publishers of books are a practical body of men,

who are by no means frantically anxious about placing the best literature before the

public. Nay, that for the most part they are mere brokers, who conduct their business on

the hardest lines of a Profit and Loss account. But supposing your book fairly launches,

its perils are only beginning. You have to run the gauntlet of the critics. To a young

author, again, this seems to be as terrible an ordeal as passing down the files of Sioux or

Comanche Indians, each one of whom is thirsting for your scalp. When you are a little

older, you will find that criticism is not much more serious than the bye-play of clowns in

a circus, when they beat around the ring the victim with bladders slung at the end of long

poses. A time comes in the life of every author when he regards critics as comical rather

than formidable, and goes his way unheeding. But there are sensitive souls that yield

under the chastisement and, perhaps after suffering much silent torture, abandon the

profession of the pen for ever. Keats, perhaps, is the saddest example of a fine spirit

hounded to death by savage criticism; because, whatever his biographers may aver, that

furious attack of Clifford and Terry undoubtedly expedited his death. But no doubt there

are hundreds who suffer keenly hostile and unscrupulous criticism, and who have to bear

that suffering in silence, because it is a cardinal principle in literature that the most

unwise thing in the world for an author is to take public notice of criticism in the way of

defending himself. Silence is the only safeguard, as it is the only dignified protest against

insult and offence.

-P.A. Sheehan

Questions

Why is the Literary Life mostly an unhappy one?

What are the ambitions of a young author?

Are editors and publishers sympathetic to young authors?

What are some of the ordeals awaiting the young authors from the critics?

What attitude should an author adopt in the face of bitter critics?

Explain: Sioux Indians; abandon the profession of the pen; laurel-crown; to run the gauntlet; hounded to death.

Write in simple English: the pangs of composition; buoyed up by the hope; mere brokers; thirsting for your scalp.

Then one day there passed by that way a Pashupata ascetic. And he said to the Brahman : "My son, what are you doing here ?" So he replied: "Reverend Sir, I am performing penance, for the expiation of sin, on the banks of the Ganges." Then the ascetic said:"What has this miserable puddle to do with the Ganges," And the Brahman said :"Is this, then, not the Ganges ?" And the ascetic laughed in his face, and said .'Truly, old as I am, I did not think that there had been folly like this in the world. Wretched man, who has deluded you ? The Ganges is hundreds of miles away, and resembles this

contemptible brook no more than Mount Meru resembles an ant-hill.' Then the Brahman said :"Reverend Sir, I am much obliged to you." And taking his pot and staff, he went forward, till at length he came to a broad river. And he rejoiced greatly, saying: "This must be the sacred Ganges." So he settled on its banks and remained there for five years, bathing every day in its waters. Then one day there came by a Kapalika, who said to him, "Why do you remain here, wasting precious time over a river of no account or sanctity, instead of going to the Ganges ?" But the Brahman was amazed, and said; "And is this, then, not the Ganges ?" Then the Kapalika replied -."This is the Ganges! Is a jackal a lion or a Chandala a Brahman ? Sir, you are dreaming." Then the Brahman sighed deeply. And he said, "Sir, I am enlightened by you." And he took his pot and staff, and went forward.

But he was now very old and feeble. And long penance had weakened his frame and exhausted his energies. And as he toiled on in the heat of the day over the burning earth, the sun beat on his head like the thunderbolt of Indra, and struck him with fever. Still he gathered himself together and struggled on, growing weaker and weaker day by day, till at last he got no further, but fell down and lay dying on the ground. But collecting all his remaining strength, with a last desperate effort he dragged himself up a low hill in front of him. And lo! there before him rolled the mighty stream of Ganges, with countless numbers of pilgrims doing penance on its banks and bathing in its stream. And in his agony he cried aloud : "O Mother Ganges ! alas ! alas ! I have pursued you all my life and now I die here helpless in sight of you." So his heart broke, and he never reached its shore.

-F.W. Bain Questions

Explain the allusion to Mount Meru and the comparison between it and an ant-hill. What was "the thunderbolt of Indra" ?

What is a "Pashupata" ascetic, a Kapalika or a Chandala ?

What do you suppose is the intention of the author in telling this very sad story ? Quote phrases from the text to show the pathos.

Comment on the significance and the author's use of the following expressions:-

"This is the Ganges ! Is a jackal a lion ---?"

"O Mother Ganges ! alas ! alas !"

What is the purpose of the words : "Reverend Sir, I am performing penance, for the expiation of sin .

One common mistake that many people have made is this: they have thought that it would be a very good thing if everybody had exactly the same amount of money, no matter whether they worked hard or lived quite idly. They forget that very few people would work at all if it were not for the money their work brings them, and that without work there would be no money. And they have imagined that if all the money in the country were equally divided everybody would be rich. Now that is a very great mistake, because there simply is not enough money to make everybody rich. If it were shared equally all round every one then would, on the basis of the calculations made in 1935, receive only about Rs. 65 a year. Today with a rise in the price level it might be Rs. 150 a year. That may be more than you receive now or it may be less, but would certainly not make you really rich. It is quite true that there are in this country a small number of very rich people; but they are so few in comparison with the whole population that even if they were to share out all their wealth among the rest, it would make very little difference. It is said that if you flattened out that great French mountain Mont Blanc, the highest mountain in Europe, and spread it over the whole of France you would only raise the level of the land by about six inches. See if you can think out what that has to do with the question I have been talking about.

Many people, unfortunately, seem to think also that Government can always pay out money quite easily and in any quantity, and they forget, of else they do not know, that the Government can only pay out money that it has received in taxes - money that the tax-payer has had to work for.

And now here is one final mistake that I should like to warn you against, Don't ever imagine that there is any thing to be ashamed of, or anything undignified, to grumble about in having to work hard for your living. If when you start work you can go into a job that suits you, so that you can really enjoy the work itself, so much the better: I hope that is what will happen, But if the work is not exactly the kind that you would choose, you must try to remember that you are helping to produce the things that other people need; you are "doing your bit" and playing your part In the work of the world- You are like a wheel, even if it is only 5 very tiny wheel, in the great world-

machinery of trade and industry that is always busily at work providing for the wants of hundreds of millions of people, and you must "put your back into it" and see to it that your particular task is always done as well as you can possibly do it. - Ernest F. Row

Questions

Why is it really necessary to work?

If all the money in the world were equally divided, everybody would be very happy. Do you agree?

The author tells us about flattening Mont Blanc and the little difference it would make in raising the level of France. What is his point in giving us this example?

Which is the best job in the world? Why must you embrace it lovingly?

What is the meaning of: “put your back into it?” “doing your bit”?

Paraphrase :"You are like a wheel…..millions of people."

All Great Thinkers live and move on a high plane of thought. It is only there they can breathe freely. It is only in contact with spirits like themselves they can live harmoniously and attain that serenity which comes from ideal companionship. The studies of all great thinkers must range along the highest altitudes of human thought, i cannot remember the name of any illuminative genius who did not drink his inspiration from fountains of ancient Greek and Hebrew writers; or such among the moderns as were pupils in ancient thought, and, in turn, became masters in their own. I have always thought that the strongest argument in favour of the Baconian theory was, that no man, however indubitable his genius, could have written the plays and sonnets that have come down to us under Shakespeare's name who had not the liberal education of Bacon. How this habit of intercourse with the gods makes one impatient of mere men. The magnificent ideals that have ever haunted the human mind, and given us our highest proofs of a future immortality by reason of the impossibility of their fulfilment here, are splintered into atoms by contact with life's realities. Hence comes our sublime discontent. You will notice that your first sensation after reading a great book is one of melancholy and dissatisfaction. The ideas, sentiments, expressions, are so far beyond those of ordinary working life that you cannot turn aside from one to the other without an acute sensation and consciousness of the contrast. And the principles are so lofty, so super-human that it is a positive pain, if once you become imbued with them, to come down and mix in the squalid surroundings of ordinary humanity. It may be spiritual or intellectual pride that is engendered on the high plane of intellectual life. But whatever it is, it becomes inevitable. An habitual meditation on the vast problems that underline human life, and are knit into human destinies-thoughts of immortality, of the littleness of mere man, of the greatness of man's soul, of the splendours of the universe that are invisible to the ordinary traffickers in the street, as the vastness of St, Peter's is to the spider that weaves her web in a corner of the dome-these things do not fit men to understand the average human being, or tolerate with patience the sordid wretchedness of the unregenerate masses. It is easy to understand, therefore, why such thinkers fly to the

solitude of their own thoughts, or the silent companionship of the immortals; and if they care to present their views in prose or verse to the world, that these views take a sombre and melancholy setting from "the pale cast of thought" in which they were engendered. -P.A. Sheehan

Questions

On what plane must great thinkers live and move?

Is a liberal education necessary to produce great literature?

Why does the reading of a great book, according to the author, make one melancholy and disappointed?

What are the things that make it hard to understand the average human being?

Although religion does not inhibit the accusation of wealth, although it does not hold up large fortunes as evil, the tenor of its teaching, by and large, is to induce an attitude of indifference to worldly things, things which gratify one's lower self and keep one engrossed in money-making. The student should be made to realize that the real goods of life are spiritual, love of things of the spirit and service of one's fellowmen, joy of an ordered disciplined life. These are blessings money cannot buy. What is wealth before such things of the spirit? Of all religious teachers Jesus Christ has dealt more comprehensively than any other with the problem of wealth in all its aspects. He may be called the greatest exponent of the science of the wealth. With only four words "Blessed are ye poor!" he changed altogether the values which man attached to human existence and human happiness and acquisition and possession of wealth. Real bliss consisted, he taught, not in riches nor in anything else which the world regarded as prosperity or felicity, but in the joy and happiness derived from being at peace with one's fellowmen through perfect love and fellowship and selfless service and sacrifice.

The word "poor" on the lips of the Master had a spiritual significance - the poor so far as they were poor in spirit, humble before God, simple, God-fearing, teachable, faithful. It could surely not have been his intention to hold up destitution and privation as a blessing in itself. That would have turned life into a terrible ordeal and it would have been heartless to exhort the poor to believe that money was not necessary for one's sustenance or the joys and blessings of life. Even things of the spirit cannot be had without money. Extreme poverty is as liable to lead to the stagnation and impoverishment of the soul as excessive wealth. Not outward poverty but inward spirit was what Jesus Christ desired and demanded. Every religion asks a man to regard his wealth as a trust. Giving in charity for the relief of the poor and public welfare is not merely an act of compassion, not merely d religious duty, but also an act of social justice. All the gospels of wealth are based on the fundamental concept that none can claim an absolute or inherent right to property. Everyone holds it in trust from God to promote the good of mankind. AU rights to private property are subject to this primary obligation to God and man. - R.P. Masani

Questions

What, according to the author, is the meaning of "indifference"? "Is it applicable to all religions?

Which are some of the real goods of spiritual living ? Is it easy to make the student realise this?

In what sense can it be said that Jesus Christ has dealt more comprehensively with the problem of wealth ? Did Mahatma Gandhi teach a similar doctrine ?

What do you understand by the phrase : "poor in spirit" ? In that case, would it be more perfect to give-away all your belongings and property and live like a pauper ?

Describe some of the drawbacks of poverty and show how money is absolutely necessary in life. Write a short paragraph developing the idea contained in the following: "Every religion asks a man to regard his wealth as a trust."

Bernard Shaw has said that poverty is a crime. Do you agree ?

The third great defect of our civilization is that it does not know what to do with its knowledge. Science has given us powers fit for the gods, yet we use them like small

children. For example, we do not know how to manage our machines. Machines were made to be man's servants; yet he has grown so dependent on them that they are in a far way to become his masters. Already most men spend most of their lives looking after and waiting upon machines. An the machines are very stern masters. They must be fed with coal, and given petrol to drink, and oil to wash with, and they must be kept at the right temperature. And if they do not get their meals when they expect them, they row sulky and refuse to work, or burst with rage, and blow up, and spread ruin and destruction all round them. So we have to wait upon them very attentively and do all that we can to keep them in a good temper. Already we find it difficult either to work or play without the machines, and a time may come when they will rule us altogether, just as we rule the animals.

And this brings me to the point at which I asked, "What do we do with all the time which

the machines have saved for us, and die new energy they have given us ?" On the whole,

it must be admitted, we do very little. For the most part we use our time and energy to

make more and better machines; but more and better machines will only give us still

more time and still more energy, and what are we to do with them ? The answer, I think,

is that we should try to become mere civilized. For the machine themselves, arid the

power which the machines have given us, are not civilization but aids to civilization. But

you will remember that we agreed at the beginning that being civilized meant making and

liking beautiful things, thinking freely, and living rightly and maintaining justice equally

between man and man. Man has a better chance today to do these things than he ever had

before; he has more time, more energy, less to fear and less to fight against. If he will

give his time and energy which his machines have won for him to making more beautiful

things, to finding out more and more about the universe, to removing the causes of

quarrels between nations, to discovering how to prevent poverty, then I think our

civilization would undoubtedly be the greater, as it would be the most lasting that there

has ever been.

- C.E.M. Joad

Questions

Instead of making machines our servants the author says they have become our masters. In what sense has this come about ?

The use of machines has brought us more leisure and more energy. But the author says that this has been a curse rather than a blessing. Why ?

What exactly is the meaning of "civilization" ? Do you agree with the author's views ?

"Making more beautiful things" What does this expression mean ? Make a list of die beautiful things that you would like to make and how you would make them.

Mention some plans you may have to prevent poverty in the world. Who would receive your most particular attention, and why ?

The author uses phrases like, "fed with coal"; "given petrol to drink"; "oil to wash"; "kept at the right temperature" What machines would require these things ?

The other day we heard someone smilingly refer to poets as dreamers. Now, it is accurate to refer to poets as dreamers, but it is not discerning to infer, as this person did, that the dreams of poets have no practical value beyond the realm of literary diversion, The truth is that poets are just as practical as people who build bridges or look into microscopes; and just as close to reality and truth, Where they differ from the logician and the scientist is in the temporal sense alone; they are ahead of their time, whereas logicians and scientists are abreast of their time. We must not be so superficial that we fail to discern the practicableness of dreams. Dreams are the sunrise streamers heralding a new day of scientific progress, another forward surge. Every forward step man takes in any field of life, is first taken along the dreamy paths of imagination. Robert Fulton did not discover his steamboat with full steam up, straining at a hawser at some Hudson River dock; first he dreamed the steamboat, he and other dreamers, and then scientific wisdom converted a picture in the mind into a reality of steel and wood. The automobile was not dug out of the ground like a nugget of gold; first men dreamed the automobile and afterward, long afterward, the practical-minded engineers caught up with what had been created by winging fantasy. He who looks deeply and with a seeing eye into the poetry of yesterday finds there all the cold scientific magic of today and much which we shall not enjoy until some tomorrow. If the poet does not dream so clearly that blueprints of this vision can immediately be drawn and the practical conversions immediately effected, he must not for that reason be smiled upon as merely the mental host for a sort of harmless madness. For the poet, like the engineer, is a specialist. His being, tuned to the life of tomorrow, cannot be turned simultaneously to the life of today. To the scientist he says, "Here, I give you a flash of the future." The wise scientist thanks him, and takes that flash of the future and makes it over into a fibre of today. - Glen Falls

Questions

Are poets dreamers? In what sense?

Is a poet a practical man? In what way?

Are dreams, according to the author, useful to the world? Why?

What was Fulton's achievement?

If the poet did not dream, what would happen?

In what way is the poet a specialist?

This romantic life in Kashmir was drawing to its end after three glorious months. Miss Joan was leaving a week earlier than Mrs. Rhodes, and about two days before she left I took her alone to the hotel for dinner. We walked to the hotel in perfect silence, a silence so heavy that I could hardly breathe. The hotel seemed to be far away and yet not far enough. That night, as I served her at table the temptation to touch her was overpowering, and I had almost forgotten myself when I dropped her coffee cup, which made me pull myself together and realize my position and my caste. On the way home there was a bridge over the canal to be crossed. She stopped on the bridge without a word, so I stopped beside her looking on to the calm water of the canal shining between the gigantic chenar trees. In the distance a gramophone was playing and the music floated over the water. We stood for a long time without saying a word to each other. I think the parting was disturbing her. There was something which she could not have explained and which she was trying to express. It might have been just a fancy of her own, or it may have been the subconscious knowledge of the secret, consuming passion of her attendant that was affecting her on this calm and beautiful night as we tarried on the bridge. It seemed to me that we stood there for ages, as if neither of us dare break the magic spell of night and music. Our houseboat was only a few yards from the bridge, and the Goodnight was the only word that passed between us as we parted - everything then went into the darkness.

The Mail lorry came up to the bridge to take her away from the romantic city of Srinagar

and away from me. -After she had taken her seat I put awoollen rug over her knees to

keep her warm on the journey, and she handed me a ten-rupee note as a parting gift and

sweetly said Good-bye. I watched her wave her hand till the lorry was out of sight. Then I

realized what I had lost, and lost for ever.

- Hazari

Questions

What was the matter with the attendant as he walked with Miss Joan to the hotel? Why did they not talk to each other?

After reading the passage can you give reasons to show what caste the attendant belonged to?

The author mentions the chenar trees of Kashmir. Give a brief but graphic description of these trees.

"I think the parting was disturbing her." Was it the romantic atmosphere of the surroundings, the thought of having to leave Kashmir, the kindness of her attendant, or thoughts of home that were the cause of the disturbance?

Why does the author call Srinagar a romantic city? Give the meaning of "romantic." Show how it may apply to Srinagar.

Why did Miss Joan give the attendant a ten-rupee note? Do friends do such things?

Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny, and now the time comes when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially. At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance. It is fitting that at this solemn moment we take the pledge of dedication to the service of India and her people and to the still larger cause of humanity.

At the dawn of history India started on her unending quest, and trackless centuries are filled with her striving and the grandeur of her success and her failures. Through good and ill fortune alike she has never lost sight of that quest or forgotten the ideals which gave her strength. We end today a period of ill fortune and India discovers herself again. The achievement we celebrate today is but a step, an opening of opportunity, to the greater triumphs and achievements that await us. Are we brave enough and wise enough to grasp this opportunity and accept the challenge of the future?

Freedom and power bring responsibility. That responsibility rests upon this Assembly, a

sovereign body representing the sovereign people of India. Before the birth of freedom

we have endured all the pains of labour and our hearts are heavy with the memory of this

sorrow. Some of those pains continue even now. Neverthless, the past is over and it is the

future that beckons to us now. That future is not one of ease or resting but of incessant

striving so that we may fulfil the pledges we have so often taken and the one we shall

take today. The service of India means the service of the millions who suffer. It means

the ending of poverty and ignorance and disease and inequality of opportunity. The

ambition of the greatest man of our generation has been to wipe every tear from every

eye. That may be beyond us, but as long as there are tears and suffering, so long our work

will not be over.

-Jawaharlal Nehru

Questions

Express in your own words: (a) we made a tryst with destiny; (b) at the stroke of the midnight hour; (,-) when the world sleeps; (d) when we step out from the old to the new;

(e) we take the pledge of dedication; if) at the dawn of history; (g) India discovers herself again; (h) with the memory of sorrow.

In what does the “Service of India” consists, according to the author?

what are the ideals which India has never forgotten?

Mention some of the responsibilities of freedom and power.

This speech is concerned with the living as well as the dead. In what way does Nehru appeal to his listeners? What motive urges Nehru to rouse the India of today to action?

Quote the line that has a direct reference to Mahatma Gandhi.

The Artist co-operates with God in making increasingly larger numbers of people see the beauty of the world which these people could never see for themselves, The world is, of course, God's artistic masterpiece; but it is the artist who lends people eyes to see it with. Browning's Fra Lippo has the last word on the subject:-For, don't you mark, we're made so that we love

First when we see them painted, things we have passed Perhaps a hundred times nor cared to see?

In this sense, Oscar Wilde's paradox is perfectly true : that Nature imitates Art; for the majority of men see in Nature what Art has taught them to see in Nature. The fogs of London, said Wilde, were the invention of Whistler. To love beauty therefore becomes to the artist, as an artist, his first duty. To love beauty, that is, to see it for himself first, and then to communicate it to others; for love implies at once vision and reproduction. It must be the first article in an artist's creed, as an artist, that beauty is the best interpreter of God to man; that; when he has got hold of beauty, he has got hold of the surest key to the knowledge of God. Keats has said that Beauty is Truth. Now, this is not true. But to us here, Beauty is, as Plato said, the splendour of Truth. The artist, as an artist, must be content with the splendour and, through this splendour strive to convey the truth. Tie has no business with truth as such as the philosopher, for instance, has. He has no concern with conduct as such, as the moralist, for instance, has. It is not his function to exhort men to good works, or to prove things; but merely to exhibitthen. Plato thought a picture, for instance, was just a copy of an object - a copy of the idea. It was Aristotle, Plato's pupil, who pointed out that, though a picture was in one sense certainly a copy and therefore something less than the object, in another sense it was something more than the object. It was, briefly, the idea of the object made visible to the eye. Art, therefore, does not consist merely in line and colour, sound and image; but primarily in ideas. Beauty may not be useful. Beauty may not improve our minds. But beauty must please. Indeed, such is the inherent delightfulness of beauty that, by its magic touch, not only the ugly becomes pleasureable, but even sorrow becomes a joy. That is the explanation of the pleasure we feel in tragedy. What would shock us in actual life gives us pleasure in a tragedy. For tragedy makes experience significant; and by making it significant, it makes it beautiful; and by making it beautiful, it makes it pleasant. And yet, it does not aim at pleasing; it only aims at exhibiting. Pleasure is not its aim; it is its effect. - Armando Menezes.

Questions

What does the artist do for most of us?

Why does the artist “lend” his eyes to people?

Explain: "Nature imitates Art."

What is the artist's first duty? Why?

What is the surest key to the knowledge of God? Why?

What is the artist's real function?

In what does Art primarily consist?

When does sorrow becomes a joy?