ZLATEH THE GOAT

ZLATEH THE GOAT
Issac Bashevis Singer
Introduction
Issac Bashevis Singer was a Polish-born Jewish writer in Yiddish. He won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1978. His first major novel, The Family Moskat was published in 1950.  As a youngster, he read Nikolai Gogol and Fyodor Dostoyevsky and proved to be a writer than a religious leader like his father. His brother Israel Joshua is also a writer.
Summary
Zlateh is the pet goat of the family. Reuven decides to sell Zlateh to the town butcher Feyvel as it has become old and gave little milk and mostly because the family wanted money to celebrate for Hanukkah which is near. When Aaron the eldest boy bound a rope around Zlateh’s neck it stood as patiently and good-naturedly as ever. It trusted human beings because they have always fed him and have never harmed him. It was a little confusing when it was taken along the road to the town because it has never been led that way before.  On the day Zlateh is being taken to the town the family grieves.  Aaron takes it to the town and there occurs a heavy snowstorm. Both Aaron and Zlateh couldn’t make their way through the snow.  Luckily they find a large haystack and make room to shelter inside it so that they are protected from the turbulent weather outside. For three continuous days they stay there and in these three days, Aaron realizes that his love for Zlateh has grown into an inseparable bond and she seems like family to him.
Aaron decides not to sell Zlateh as she has saved him by providing her milk to quench his hunger. Zlateh also feels grateful to Aaron for saving her from the heavy snow and providing her ample hay. After their return home Zlateh is treated majestically.
Exercises
I. Answer the following questions:
1. How does Aaron react to his father’s decision to sell Zlateh?
He is sad but still obeys his father’s wishes.
2. What does Aaron recognize from his stay in the haystack?
 Zlateh is his friend and cannot be sold.
3. Aaron gets lost because___________
Snow covers the road
4. Why does the father want to sell Zlateh?
  The family needs money to celebrate Hanukkah
II. Answer the following questions in a sentence or two:
1. Why was it a bad year for Reuven the furrier?
That year the winter has been slow and relatively mild, and there has been little need of a furrier’s service.
2. What was the family’s response when Reuven asked Aaron to take the goat to town?
Leah, the mother wiped the tears from her eyes. Aaron’s younger sisters, Anna and Mirian, cried loudly.
3. Why did Zlateh trust human beings?
 She knew that they always fed her and never did any harm.
4. Why was Zlateh astonished when Aaron led her out on the town road?
 Zlateh has never been led in the direction of the town before.
5. When did Aaron realize that he was no longer traveling on the road?
  Beneath the thick snow Aaron’s boots touched the softness of the plowed field.
6. What looked like a ‘snow clad hill’?
A large stack of hay
7. Why did Aaron realize that the haystack could save them?
Aaron was a village boy and he knew it is always warm in a haystack.
8. What did Aaron do to breathe inside the haystack?
He bored a window through the hay.
9. What does it mean that Zlateh seemed eager to reward Aaron and how does it fit with what you have already learned about Zlateh?
Zlateh is a patient, good-natured goat. She wanted to thank Aaron for bringing her to a home, made of food and she was happy to give Aaron her milk.
10. What do you understand from the way Aaron and Zlateh communicated with each other?
Each wanted to show their gratitude for saving each other lives from the stormy snowfall.
11. How many days did Aaron and Zlateh spend inside the haystack?
3 days
12. What were Aaron’s dreams about while he was staying inside the haystack?
He dreamed of green fields, trees covered with blossoms, clear brooks, and singing birds.
III. Answer the questions in a paragraph:
1. The circumstances that compelled Reuven to decide on selling Zlateh.
          That year the winter has been slow and relatively mild, and there has been little need of a furrier’s service. It was the time of Hanukkah and the family had little money to celebrate the festival. With much hesitation, Reuven decided to sell Zlateh to Feyvel for eight guldens.
2. The communication between Aaron and his goat.
      During the four days sheltering in a stack of hay, Zlateh realized there was an inseparable bond between him and his goat. He felt lonely and missed his family. He had always loved Zlateh but now she seemed to be like a sister. He wanted to talk to someone and started talking to Zlateh. To every sentence, Aaron made she just replied in her single sound “maa”. She can’t speak but she understood what Aaron told her. Her language consisted of only one sound, but many meanings.
3. Compare the character of Zlateh and Aaron.
      Zlateh is the family pet goat. It is so bonded with the family members. It is patient and good-natured. Zlateh trusted human beings because she knew that they always fed her and never did any harm. It believes so because no one in the family has caused any harm to it. Aaron doesn’t want to sell Zlateh, but he has to obey his father who has decided to sell Zlateh off for eight guldens. Zlateh innocently follows Aaron through the unfamiliar road to town.  After their challenging way out of snow, they are both grateful to each other.
4. The days Aaron and his goat spent inside the haystack.
      Aaron hollowed out a nest for himself and the goat. He also bored a window through the hay and snow and kept the passage clear.  Zlateh was hungry and eagerly ate the hay around. Aaron ate the two slices of bread and cheese that he had with him. He was still hungry and drank his goat’s milk. When he felt lonely he would talk to Zlateh and she would reply with her usual “maaa”. At night the snow had blocked up the window. He dreamed of summers while in the haystack.
5. The change of weather in Singer’s Zlateh the goat.
      At the beginning of the story it is said that year the winter was mild. It was almost the time of Hanukkah but there was only a little snow. The peasants complained that because of the dry weather there would be a poor harvest of winter grain. It was a bad year for Reuven. But on the day Zlateh was taken to sell, there occurred heavy snowstorm continuously for three days. Though the three days of the snowstorm was difficult for Zlateh and Aaron, it turned out to bring good days for him and his family. Zlateh was saved and they decided to never sell it off, the bond between Aaron and Zlateh grew even stronger. It also conveys that the windy snowy days are to bring good for the peasants and the furrier. 

ON KILLING A TREE

ON KILLING A TREE
Gieve Patel
Introduction
Born in 1940, Gieve Patel is an important presence in the history of modern Indian poetry in English. He is a poet, playwright and painter, as well as a doctor by profession. He has written three books of poetry (Poems, How Do You Withstand, Body and Mirrored Mirroring); three plays (Princes, Savaksa and Mr Behram); and held several exhibitions of his paintings in India and abroad. He lives in Mumbai.
“Gieve Patel is hardly an avant-garde writer and he does not pretend to be one,” writes scholar Sudesh Mishra. “Belonging to the same generation as (Adil) Jussawalla and (Arvind Krishna) Mehrotra, he is a poet whose vision eludes simplistic modernist labels and equations.” Mishra attributes this to the fact that Patel (like poets Kamala Das and Jayanta Mahapatra) has never been a formal student of literature or linguistics.

          The enduring concerns in Patel’s poetry are the besieged terrain of the human body, its frailty, absurdity and perishability; the vulgar social inequalities of caste and class that continue to assail post-Independence India; the predicament of the subaltern, perennially relegated to the sidelines of history and art; the daily catalog of violence, conflict and pain that make up “the century’s folk song”; the perpetual looming shadow of physical death; and a probing curiosity about what – if anything – lies beyond a world of fraught materiality.

        In the accompanying interview, Patel describes himself as “a profane monk” whose poetry reveals “a slightly sick concern with the body”. This preoccupation is evident in Patel’s poetic terrain (evoked time and again with horrified but rapt fascination): a world of nerve endings and viscera, ragged fiber and vein, gnarled root and leprous hide, pervaded by the overwhelmingly organic odors of sex, secretion and excretion. The tone is frequently flat, dispassionate, even offhand, wary of any attempt to ennoble, prettify or sentimentalize the subject matter. The existential questions – and they are never far away in Patel’s work – are not presented as airy abstractions; they emerge thickly, haltingly, from the glutinous dough of corporeality that is the focus of what seems to be the gaze of a committed forensic pathologist.
Exercises
I. Answer the following questions
1. In which collection was the poem “On Killing a Tree” originally published?
a. Poems      b. How Do You Withstand, Body   c. Mirrored Mirroring  d. None of these
Ans: Poems
2. What does the word “hide” mean in leprous hide?
a. Skin  b. leaf  c. Sickness D. None of these
Ans: Skin
II. Answer the following questions in a sentence or two;
1. Comment on the opening line of the poem “On Killing a Tree”
According to him, it will take too much time to kill a tree. It is not just a simple jab: a quick stab or blow: to do the job.
2. Why does the poet say that a simple job of the knife will not kill a tree?
It is not so easy to kill a tree because the tree has grown over a period of time, taking in from the earth, sun, air, and water.

3. Why does the poet try to teach us how to kill a tree?
If not uprooted properly the tree can grow from its roots again. Here through sarcasm and irony the poet implies his anger against cutting trees.
4. What does the poet say of the resiliatory power of trees?
The bleeding bark of the tree will heal and it will rise and grow to its former size from its roots.
5. What does the poet mean by anchoring earth and earth cave?
Earth is here portrayed as a ‘cave’ or Mother Earth, the cave being symbolic of the womb. While the root remains hidden in the cave of Mother Earth, even though Man may attack the tree, his reach is limited. He may chop off the leaves and the branches, but so long as the root is safe within the earth, the tree will not be seriously injured or damaged. At some point, Man seems to get this, and so he targets the part of the tree that holds the secret connection between the source of life and the tree, the root.
6. What does the pet mean by the strength of the tree exposed?
The strength of the tree lies in its roots, which the poet asks to snap out in order to kill the tree. Thus, the phrase “the strength of the tree exposed” refers to the roots of the tree being exposed to sunlight and air.
7. What does the poet mean by the last line “and then it is done?”
Then the poet concludes the poem with the phrase: “It is done.” That brief statement encompasses the triumphant tone of the humans who have at last succeeded in killing the tree.
8. What is the tone of Gieve Patel’s poem On Killing a Tree?
Sarcasm and irony.
9. Comment on the imagery of the bleeding bark.
Once the tree is chopped its sap will trickle off which is compared to blood.
III. Answer the following questions in a paragraph
1. The step by step process needed for killing a tree.
Gieve Patel sarcastically explains the process of cutting a tree as a voice against cutting trees in his poem ‘On Killing a Tree’. It should not be done using a knife but it is to be hacked and chopped. That is not enough as new sprouts will come out of it, so it should be pulled out from its roots. It is to be roped, tied and pulled out, snapped out from the earth. Then it must be put to scorch and choke under the sun, thereby browning, hardening and withering
2. Why it is not an easy job to kill a tree?
It is not so easy to kill a tree because the tree has grown over a period of time, taking in from the earth, sun, air, and water. One will not succeed in doing so by just a “jab”, a stroke of a knife. It has been nourished by the very elements of existence, earth, wind, water and air. So, in pitting himself against a tree, in a sense, a human pits himself against all these elements that have invested their strength in the tree. That’s why it’s not so easy to kill.
3. Comment on the language of the poem
4. What is the message of On killing a tree?
The poem on killing a tree is Patel’s wake up call to the citizen of the 21st century to think again before they heartlessly chop trees. It’s time to become conscious of the irreversible damage we are un‐thinkingly doing to our home planet, Earth. It is also time to take a more holistic life on Earth, considering trees and plants not as lower life forms that can be treated treat without compassion, but rather as an equally important aspect of Nature. Only this change in attitude can ensure that our beautiful green planet will continue to be habitable for our future generations.

IV. Answer the following questions in about 300 words
1. “On Killing a Tree” describes man cruelty and violence to nature discuss.
Gieve Patel sarcastically explains the process of cutting a tree as a voice against cutting trees in his poem ‘On Killing a Tree’. Though the poet employs skillful process of killing a tree, he is actually showing his resentment against those who kill nature. His style is ironic and detached. It is a graphic picture of man’s cruelty towards Nature which is symbolized by the tree. He gives a total description of the annihilation of a tree. Man’s greed is not quenched by the mere physical process of killing a tree. The tree which symbolizes Nature has grown Slowly consuming the earth and rising out of its crust. It takes much time to kill it
It should not be done in a “simple jab of the knife” but it is to be hacked and chopped. That is not enough as new sprouts will come out of it, so it should be pulled out from its roots. It is to be roped, tied and pulled out, snapped out from the earth. Then it must be put to scorch and choke under the sun, thereby browning, hardening and withering. The poet brings all the cruelty done to trees by humans. Often it is forgotten that trees are living things and nature is often neglected in the mad race of human greediness. This greediness to wealth has made man insensitive and heartless to other organisms. Tomorrow’s concerns are less important. He does not think of preserving this earth fit for living for coming generations. His cruelties continue when the tree log is left to scorch and burn in the sun.
 The poem is also about the endless generosity nature offers to man. However man’s cruelties continue the tree is in constant persistence to be born again.
“The bleeding bark will heal
And from close to the ground
Will rise curled green twigs”
The lines, shows the tree’s attempt to revive from its broken parts. Its strength is offered by nature. It absorbs sunlight, air and water for its sustenance but man exploits nature for his greed.

                                             **********************

Module II – Sustainable Environment
THE END OF LIVING - THE BEGINNING OF SURVIVAL
Chief Seattle
Introduction
Chief Seattle (c 1780—June 7, 1866) was chief of Duwamish tribe of the Native Americans in western Washington and metropolitan Seattle. In 1854, the government of the United States of America made an offer for a large area of Indian land and promised a ‘reservation’ for the Indian people. Chief Seattle's reply to the proposal—the prose passage named ‘The End of Living and the Beginning of Survival’—remains a most beautiful and profound statement on environment and related issues. There is a great deal of controversy surrounding the speech of 1854. There are many conflicting pieces of information, various versions of the speech, different dates, and debates over its very existence.
Summary
This is an inspiring speech delivered by Chief Seattle, a Native American leader, as a response to an offer made by the President of the United States to buy their land. He feels and argues that it is impossible to buy or sell natural resources like air, water, and land because we do not own them. They are a gift. He says that every part of the earth is sacred to him and his people; they are a part of the earth and the earth is a part of them. Even the souls of the Native Americans do not leave their land. Instead, they make it their permanent residence, unlike in the belief systems of mainstream religions. In short, the earth is not an inanimate tract of land, but a living presence to be treated with love, care, respect, and fear. But the worldview of white men is entirely different. For them, it is an object to be tamed, conquered, and exploited to the full, until it ceases to be useful. For Native Americans, on the contrary, all-natural phenomena are their own siblings. It is true that the President has promised to take care of them like a father. He has also promised to give them a special area where they can continue living with all their rites, rituals and other cultural practices. But still, the sale is going to be difficult as the pangs of parting with such a dear and sacred place are excruciating. The Chief suggests some conditions. If at all the transaction takes place, white men should remember that land is sacred and inviolable. They should also teach their children the same. The Chief wants white men to treat rivers and beasts as their own brothers, not to be seen through a utilitarian perspective. They have seen white men pollute rivers and shoot animals for the sake of fun. The reality is that every object in nature is connected to each other. Whatever happens to animals and land will happen to us sooner or later. No one can escape this fate. The earth does not belong to us but we belong to the earth and all are bonded like family members. For his people, the din, frenzy and chaos of modern cities are a painful sight. The simple pleasures of nature are more precious and more important than anything else. They treat rain, wind, and land as living organisms just like humans. Unfortunately, the white man has neither the sense nor the sensibility to feel the pulse of nature. Chief Seattle ironically and sarcastically adds that perhaps the problem is with himself and his people—they are uneducated, uncultured and uncivilized!
The holistic vision of the speech is reiterated at the end within a theological framework. There is only one God and He does not discriminate between peoples. White or red, human beings are equal in His eyes. The earth is precious to Him and to harm the earth is to heap contempt on the creator. Destiny is a mystery to the Native Americans too, but they do realize that the changed environment marks the end of living and the beginning of survival.

Comments
It should be noted that from the 1860s to the 1930s, under the Federal Homestead Act, the American government allocated at low or no cost some 246 million acres of land of Native Americans for farm homesteads to about 1.5 million people, almost entirely from the white population. One can argue that animism—the belief that non-human entities have also souls—informs the speech though it is believed that the Chief embraced Roman Catholicism in 1848.
It is obvious that the beliefs of people almost directly impact their attitude to nature and other peoples. For example, sacred groves in India remain miniature forests not because people are alive to the dangers of deforestation and its accompanying evils but simply they do not want to incur the wrath of irascible snake gods! Whatever be the underpinning belief system, the net result is desirable: at least some parts of the land remain intact. Similar is the case of animals. Practically all religious groups consider certain animals holy or satanic. Irrespective of the attitudes, the final result is that these animals are shunned from habitats and carefully kept away from culinary habits. The speech raises some interesting questions that deserve deep contemplation. For example, it problematizes anthropocentric philosophies and theologies. Have we, the humans, been divinely authorized to dominate the earth and all other organisms? Predictably, we cannot come up with a tailor-made answer. Attitudes vary (often so subtly that we cannot tell one from the other) from culture to culture, from religion to religion. The Biblical god vests come privileges on mankind: “. . . have dominion over the fish and the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” How far is it logical to say that this view has permeated the gamut of western weltanschauung? On the other hand, in India many animals are closely associated with deities, as vehicles, servants or symbols. In Vedic literature, Dawn, a female deity, rides a chariot drawn by seven cows and the cow is treated as holy by many sects. The donkey is the vehicle of Shitala Devi, the goddess who is invoked to ward off smallpox, even as her anger can bring it on. Are we to understand that these animals are revered and feared because of their association with divine figures? Are Indians any better than westerners in treating animals?
Exercises
I. Answer the following questions
1. In which year did Chief Seattle make the address titled the End of Living and the beginning of survival?
a) 1866      b) 1854     c) 1887     d) 1845
Ans: 1854
2. In which language did Chief Seattle make his speech?
a) French   b) English     c) Lushootseed     d) Spanish
Ans: Lushootseed
3. Whose translation of Chief Seattle’s speech was published in Seattle Sunday star in 1887?
Ans: Henri A Smith
4. Whom does Chief Seattle mean by the great chief in Washington?
Ans: Great chief refers to the father of Chief Seattle
5. What does Seattle mean by the smoking iron horse?
Ans: The smoking iron horse refers to the train
6. To which tribe did Chief Seattle belong?
Ans: Suquamish tribe
II. Answer the following questions in a sentence or two:
1. Why does Chief Seattle say that buying or selling the land is strange to Native Americans?
Seattle says that buying their land will not be easy for the Great Chief in Washington, because this land is sacred to them. The shining water in the streams and rivers is the blood of their ancestors
2. What are the different attitudes of the whites and native Americans to the country of their birth?
The white treats his mother, the earth, and his brother, the sky as things to be bought, plundered sold like sheep or bright beads. But for Americans the country of their earth is sacred.
3. What does Seattle say about the cities of the white man?
The cities of the white man are full of din, frenzy, and chaos, and the sight of these cities pains their eyes.
4. What does the Native American see the rivers and the earth?
He says that every part of the earth is sacred to him and his people; they are a part of the earth and the earth is a part of them. For them rivers are brothers who quench their thirst.
5. What does Seattle want the white man to teach their children?
Seattle wants the white men to teach their children that the land is sacred and that each ghostly reflection in the clear water of the lakes tells of events and memories in the life of his people. The water's murmur is the voice of his father's father.
6. What is the difference between living and surviving?
Living is a meaningful existence with many activities including hopes for a bright future whereas survival is the bare minimum mode of existence in which a being struggles to remain alive somehow.
7.  Explain the sarcasm in the words of Seattle when he says’ I am a savage and do not understand,            
When Seattle says that he is a savage, he means that the Whiteman is a savage and he does not understand the sacred earth, trees, rivers, sky, and the beasts and birds, there is no quiet place in the Whiteman’s cities. He does not seem to notice the air he breathes, and like a man dying for many days, he is numb to the stench.
8. What will happen to man if all the beats are gone/
If all the beasts are gone man would die from a great loneliness of spirit. For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man.
9. How does the Indian look upon water
According to them each ghostly reflection in the clear water of the lakes tells of events and memories in the life of their people. The water’s murmur is the voice of their fathers father.
10. What are the conditions laid by Seattle to sell his land to the great chief
The Great Chief must keep the land apart and sacred, as a place where the white man can go taste the wind. The Whiteman must treat the beasts of this land as his brothers. He must teach his children that the earth is the Redman’s mother
I. Answer the following questions in a paragraph
1. The different approaches of the Whites and the Native Americans to the environment
The speech of Seattle brings out the two world views on environment which are diametrically opposed to each other. The White settler is a representative of western outlook on environment which places man above everything. It is the anthropocentric or human-centered concept of ecology. According to this theory, living beings and nonliving exist for the sake of man. In other words, it is the concept of shallow ecology that the white hold on to. On the other hand, the Red Indian speaks through the author. Seattle strongly advocates the theory of all-inclusiveness or the concept of Deep Ecology. He says, "For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man. All things are connected". He asks the white settlers to teach their children that the earth is our mother. Again, "the earth does not belong to man; man belongs to the earth...... all things are connected". This is a direct and convincing affirmation that both the Redman and the White man are the son s of God. Hence they are brothers.
2. Native American criticism of the white man’s treatment of mother earth
Speaking on behalf of the Red Indians, Seattle criticizes the Whiteman’s attitude towards Mother Earth. The Whiteman leaves his father's grave behind. He kidnaps the earth from his children. The earth is not his brother, but his enemy. His appetite devours the earth and leaves behind only a desert. He forgets his father's grave and his children's birthright. He treats his mother, the earth, and his brother, the sky as things to be bought, plundered, sold like sheep, or bright beads. There is no quiet place in the Whiteman’s cities. There is no place to hear the unfurling of leaves in spring or the rustle of an insect's wings. The Whiteman does not seem to notice the air he breathes. Like a dying man, he is insensitive to the stench.
3. Comment on the passion and feelings conveyed in chief Seattle speech
Chief Seattle feels and argues that it is impossible to buy or sell natural resources like air, water, and land because we do not own them. They are a gift. He says that every part of the earth is sacred to him and his people; they are a part of the earth and the earth is a part of them. Even the souls of the Native Americans do not leave their land. Instead, they make it their permanent residence, unlike in the belief systems of mainstream religions. In short, the earth is not an inanimate tract of land, but a living presence to be treated with love, care, respect and fear. But the worldview of white men is entirely different. For them, it is an object to be tamed, conquered and exploited to the full, until it ceases to be useful. For Native Americans, on the contrary, all natural phenomena are their own siblings.

II. Answer the following questions in about 300 words
1. Summarize the major arguments in Chief Seattle’s speech
Chief Seattle argues that it is impossible to buy or sell natural resources like air, water and land because we do not own them. They are a divine gift. Every part of the earth is sacred to him and his people; they are a part of the earth and vice versa. Even the souls of the Native Americans do not leave their land. Instead, they make it their permanent residence, unlike in the belief systems of mainstream religions. In short, the earth is not an inanimate tract of land, but a living presence to be treated with love, care, respect and fear. As far as the white man is concerned, land is a mere hostile territory to be tamed, conquered and exploited to the full until it ceases to be useful any longer. For them it is a buyable and sellable commodity unworthy of human emotions. He has no religious, spiritual, genealogical or eschatological associations to the land and naturally there is nothing that ties the white man down to it. Land is uniform all over the world and it is a surface to build noisy cities on. Chief Seattle justifiably fears that the white man’s appetite would devour the earth and reduce it into an arid dessert. It is true that the President has promised to take care of the Native Americans like a father. He has also promised to give them a special area where they can continue living with all their rites, rituals and other cultural practices. But still the sale is going to be difficult because the pangs involved in parting with such a dear and sacred place are acute. Seattle wants white men to teach their children that the land is sacred and inviolable. He wants them to treat rivers and beasts as their own brothers and to approach nature with moderation. Indians have seen White men pollute rivers and shoot animals for the sake of fun. The reality is that every object in the nature is connected to each other. Whatever happens to animals and land will happen to us sooner or later. No one can escape this fate. The earth does not belong to us but we belong to the earth and all are bonded like family members. For his people the din, frenzy and chaos of modern cities are a painful sight. For them simple pleasures of nature are more precious and more important than anything else. They treat rain, wind and land as living organisms. Unfortunately the white man has neither the sense nor the sensibility to feel the pulse of nature. Chief Seattle ironically and sarcastically adds that perhaps the problem is with himself and his people—they are uneducated, uncultured and uncivilized!
The holistic vision of the speech is reiterated at the end within a theological framework. There is only one God and He does not discriminate between people. White or red, human beings are equal in His eyes. The earth is precious to Him and to harm the earth is to heap contempt on the creator. Destiny is a mystery to the Native Americans too, but they do realize that the changed environment marks the end of living and the beginning of survival

2. Chief Seattle’s speech is a powerful plea for respect of Native Americans rights and environmental values. Substantiate
Seattle’s letter to the American Government is a passionate plea for respect on the part of humans for environment as it emphasizes the need for holistic vision, interconnected nature of living organisms, preservation of environment, unitary nature of the universe and a new vision of development. The anthropocentric, utilitarian, materialistic and parochial worldview of white settlers considers earth an inanimate object to be tamed, conquered, plundered and exploited with scant regard for posterity. Land is uniform everywhere with no spiritual values and associations. While one piece of land runs out its utility, they march ahead looking for another. But for Native Americans earth and natural resources are a divine gift—sacred and inviolable. They are a part of the earth and vice versa. Earth is a living presence to be treated with love, care, respect and fear. Everything is interconnected. Whatever happens to animals and land will happen to us sooner or later. For them rain, wind and land are living organisms just like humans. There is only one God and He does not discriminate between peoples. The earth is precious to Him and to harm earth is equal to scorn Him. According to Chief Seattle, even the souls of the Native Americans do not leave their land. Instead, they make it their permanent residence, unlike in the belief systems of mainstream religions. But the unscrupulous white settlers destroy it and deny his own children the graces of the earth and prevent them from enjoying the music of nature. Modern cites are full of din, frenzy and chaos and city dwellers are missing the simple pleasures of nature. White man, in his critical view, is incapable of sensing the subtle aspects and changes of nature. Chief Seattle makes it abundantly clear that all living and non-living beings are interconnected and depend on each other. To extinct one species is a crime to ourselves, future generations and to God. What we need is a new paradigm of development which takes into account the importance of nature and the delicate relations that structure the world.

                                                    ******************************

Write  an essay  of  300  words

1. Attempt a critical appreciation of John Donne’s A Valediction Forbidding?
A Valediction  Forbidding  Mourning Mourning is one of the better-known poems of Donne for its conceit of the compass. It is a typical metaphysical poem which was addressed to the poet’s wife. It was written on the occasion of the poet’s departure for France with Sir Robert  Drury.

The poem expresses Donne’s positive attitude towards love. The basic theme of the poem is the union of true lovers even when they are physically separated. The poet piles up  a number of arguments to  prove the point, and thus he persuades his beloved not to grieve at the time of his departure for  France. Donne says to his wife that like the virtuous people, let them  also accept their separation quietly with no tears or sighs.

 Donne is poking fun at the idea that tears would cause a flood, or turbulence of deep sigh is sufficient to let lose a tempest. The poet says that their love is something spiritual and so the physical separation that they endure is not be dreaded. Only the earthly love will break and cracks when there is separation. Their love fined that it is not dependent on physical sensation.

The poet further says that love has fused their two souls into one. Therefore, even if he has to go away, their souls would not be separated.  His absence would not cause any breach of in their love. Rather, his going away,  only means that their love would cover a larger area, just as gold,  when beaten,  does not break but expands wider and wider.

Metaphysical means which is beyond physical - the immortal soul and the existence of a supreme being. Donne employs the famous metaphysical conceit of the compass to prove the nature of their love. They are like the two legs of a compass. She is like the fixed foot of the compass which remains fixed at the center. But it leans and follows the other foot when it moves, and grows erect and unites with the moving foot when it returns to the starting point after completing the circle. Similarly, it is the firmness of her love that enables him to complete his journey successfully and then return home.

The poem is a typical metaphysical poem with its brilliant use of an array of poetic techniques such as metaphor,  paradox, simile,  conceit,  alliteration, and rhyme scheme, with objects and ideas drawn from a wide spectrum of knowledge, life astronomy, metallurgy, geology, and geometry.

POEM

A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning

As virtuous men pass mildly away,

   And whisper to their souls to go,

Whilst some of their sad friends do say

   The breath goes now, and some say, No:

So let us melt, and make no noise,

   No tear-floods, nor sigh-tempests move;

'Twere profanation of our joys

   To tell the laity our love.

Moving of th' earth brings harms and fears,

   Men reckon what it did, and meant;

But trepidation of the spheres,

   Though greater far, is innocent.

Dull sublunary lovers' love

   (Whose soul is sense) cannot admit

Absence, because it doth remove

   Those things which elemented it.

But we by a love so much refined,

   That our selves know not what it is,

Inter-assured of the mind,

   Care less, eyes, lips, and hands to miss.

Our two souls therefore, which are one,

   Though I must go, endure not yet

A breach, but an expansion,

   Like gold to airy thinness beat.

If they be two, they are two so

   As stiff twin compasses are two;

Thy soul, the fixed foot, makes no show

   To move, but doth, if the other do.

And though it in the center sit,

   Yet when the other far doth roam,

It leans and hearkens after it,

   And grows erect, as that comes home.

Such wilt thou be to me, who must,

   Like th' other foot, obliquely run;

Thy firmness makes my circle just,

   And makes me end where I begun.

CLAIMING AN EDUCATION
ADRIENNE RICH

Introduction
Adrienne Cecile Rich (May 16, 1929 – March 27, 2012), the renowned poet, essayist and political activist who famously defined herself as a “woman,lesbian and feminist”,  was born in Baltimore, the USA in 1929. In the final year of graduation, she won the prestigious Yale series of Younger Poets Award for her book A Change of world in 1951. Her second collection of poetry entitled The Diamond Cutters in 1955. In the tumultuous 1960s, she became a great champion of the oppressed by standing for the rights of women and the sexual minorities, besides her participation in civil rights moment and anti-Vietnam War protests. She was called "one of the most widely read and influential poets of the second half of the 20th century",and was credited with bringing "the oppression of women and lesbians to the forefront of poetic discourse." Her works Snapshots of a Daughter-in-Law (1963) and Leaflets (1969) were testimonies of her politics. Rich won the 1974 National Book Award, for  Diving in to the Wreck (1973), one of her most celebrated collections consisting of angry exploratory poems. The questioning of patriarchal assumptions, the need for change and the power of the will were the themes in her early writings until the publication of The Dream of a Common Language (1978) which argues for a common women's language, a concern of most feminists all over the globe in the 1970s. Due to her differences with the policies of the US government and President Clinton, she refused to accept the prestigious National Medal for the Arts in 1997. She died on 27th March, 2012 at the age of eighty two.
Her political belief is best manifested in her comment: “All human life on the planet is born of woman, the one unifying, incontrovertible experience shared by all women and men is that months- long period we spent unfolding inside a woman's body.”  the speech, titled “Claiming an education,” was first printed in the magazine The Common Woman in 1977 and eventually reprinted in the collection On Lies, Secrets, and Silence: Selected Prose 1966-1978.

Summary
In Adrienne Rich's essay, She speaks to a group of female students at Douglass college,USA. She starts out by saying that University education implies an ethical and intellectual contract between teacher and student. Although it is unwritten one must look onto it because you cannot afford to think of being here to receive an education, you will do much better to think of yourselves as being here to claim one.  The difference is that between acting and being acted-upon. So take responsibility toward yourselves. Responsibility to yourself means refusing to let others do your thinking, talking, and naming for you; it means learning to respect and use your own brains and instincts; hence, grappling with hard work. And don't fall for shallow and easy solutions-predigested books and ideas, weekend encounters guaranteed to change your life, taking "gut" courses instead of ones you know will challenge you, bluffing at school and life instead of doing solid work. She emphasis that in case of women the matter is of life and death. She believes that the most devastating weakness in education is the exclusion of women in the academic community. Although nowadays we see an increasing number of women in universities, there are still very few of those institutions that women take part of as faculty.
It means that we insist on a life of meaningful work, insist that work be as meaningful as love and friendship in our lives. The courage to be "different." The difference between a life lived actively, and a life of passive drifting and dispersal of energies, is an immense difference. Clear thinking, active discussion, and excellent writing are all necessary for intellectual freedom, and that these require hard work. This means seeking out criticism, recognizing that the most affirming thing anyone can do for Rich claims that everything one learns reflects how men have perceived history and experiences.

EXERCISES
I. Answer the following questions:
1. In which collection was ''Claiming an education'' included?
a. The Dream of a Common Language           b. On Lies, Secrets,and Silence
c. Leaflets                                                        d. None of These
Ans: b. On Lies, Secrets,and Silence
2. In which college did Adrienne Rich deliver the speech entitled '' Claiming an Education ''?
Ans: Douglass College, New Jersey, USA.
3. who was the author of Jane Eyre?
Ans: Charlotte Bronte
4. who stated that ' Women's  apprehension is quicker than that of men, but their defect lies for the must part in the logical faculty and in the higher mental activities'?
Ans: Elizabeth Barret Browning

II. Answer the following questions in a sentence or two:
1. How did Adrienne Rich plan to separate her remarks into two parts?
Adrienne Rich planned to separate her remarks into two parts by saying some thoughts about women students and some thoughts about teachers, who teach in a women's college. But both are indivisible. That there is an "ethical and intellectual" contract between a student and their professor.

2. Mention one of the devastating weaknesses of the university learning, according to Rich.
According to Rich, one of the devastating weaknesses of the university learning has been its almost total ensure of women's experience and thought from the curriculum, and its exclusion of women as members of the academic community.

3. What is the difference between to claim an education and to receive an education?
The difference between to claim an education and to receive an education is that one is acting and another is being acted-upon, and for women it can literally mean the difference between life and death.

4. Why did the women students and teachers demand for the introduction of women's studies courses?
The women students and teachers demand for the introduction of women's studies courses to claim a women-directed education.

5. How does Adrienne Rich define 'taking responsibility towards yourselves', from the feminists perspective?
Responsibility to yourself means refusing to let others do your thinking, talking, and naming for you; it means learning to respect and use your own brains and instincts; hence, grappling with hard work.

6. How did Elizabeth Barret Browning express her impatience with studies?
Elizabeth Barret Browning express her impatience with studies by writing against the 'passive recipiency' in the mind. She said that women want to be made to think actively because their ability to understand is quicker than that of men, but their defect lies for the most part in the logical faculty and in the higher mental activities.

7. What, according to Rich, is the courage to be 'different'?
According to Rich, is the courage to be 'different', means women should be able to demand from others- parents, friends,roommates,teachers, lovers, husband and children to respect their sense of purpose and their integrity as persons.

8. What, according to Rich, is the second part of the contract?
The second part of the contract is that in a women's college the students have the right to expect their faculty to take them seriously because many male professors still feel that teaching in a women's college is a second-rate career.

9. What are the necessary ingredients of intellectual freedom?
Clear thinking, active discussion, and excellent writing are all necessary for intellectual
freedom, and that these require hard work.

10. What does Adrienne Rich mean by 'students demand to be taken seriously' ?
Women's students demand to be taken seriously' , because they also have the inborn potentialities so the teachers must be committed  to the belief that women's minds and experiences are basically valuable and unavoidable to any civilization worthy the name.

III. Answer the following questions in a paragraph:
1. Adrienne Rich's prose style in “Claiming An Education”?
In Adrienne Rich's essay 'claiming an education', the author speaks of the female experience against the backdrop of the male- dominated 'mainstream' academia. Although this essay was written in 1979, her points seems timeless. The work considered confrontational, argumentative and oratorical, this prose works have a oratorical style with didactic in tone. The entire work has a long sentences and very few simple sentences. Her language has a strong feminist touch and denouncing patriarchy in terms. She even coined some new terminologies like 'passive recipiency' ,' group therapy'.

2. The gendered bias in education, according to Adrienne Rich?
Adrienne Rich says that there is a lot of gendered bias in education because men had perceived and organized in their experience, their history, their social relationships, good and evil,etc.that is what taught in colleges. Even science can be racist and sexist. Some time male professors feel that teaching in a women's college is a second-rate career. It is only within the last 100 years that higher education has been opened to up to women. The books we study have names like 'The Descent of Man', 'Man and His Symbols', 'The Future of Man', 'Man and Machine' etc. these books pretending to describe a human reality that does not include over one-half the human species.

3. How does Adrienne Rich elaborate the concept of responsibility to oneself ?
Adrienne Rich elaborate the concept of responsibility to oneself, by saying that one should refuse to let others to do your thinking, talking, and naming for you; it means learning to respect yourself and use your own brains and instincts; hence, grappling with hard work. And don't fall for shallow and easy solutions-predigested books and ideas, weekend encounters guaranteed to change your life, taking "gut" courses instead of ones you know will challenge you, bluffing at school and life instead of doing solid work. Have the courage to be 'different', which means women should be able to demand from others- parents, friends,roommates,teachers, lovers, husband and children to respect their sense of purpose and their integrity as persons. Don't sit in passive silence even when you disagree inwardly with everything that is being said around you.

4. What should be the contract between the students and faculty?
Adrienne Rich starts her essay by saying that University education implies an ethical and intellectual contract between teacher and student. Although it is unwritten one must look onto it because you cannot afford to think of being here to receive an education, you will do much better to think of yourselves as being here to claim one. And she describes the contract between professor and student is like a "pledge of mutual seriousness". The professors should take them seriously because they also have the inborn potentialities so the teachers must be committed  to the belief that women's minds and experiences are basically valuable and unavoidable to any civilization worthy the name.

IV. Answer the following questions in about 300 words:
1. “Claiming An Education” is a  critique of the present system of education from a woman's perspective. Discuss?
In Adrienne Rich's essay, "Claiming an Education", the author speaks of the female experience against the backdrop of the male-dominated "mainstream" academia of Western thought. Although this essay was written in 1979, many of Rich's points seem timeless. She starts out by saying that University education implies an ethical and intellectual contract between teacher and student. Although it is unwritten one must look onto it because you cannot afford to think of being here to receive an education, you will do much better to think of yourselves as being here to claim one.  The difference is that between acting and being acted-upon.
Perhaps the most meaningful was the advice to "take responsibility towards yourselves". Adrienne Rich elaborate the concept of responsibility to oneself, by saying that one should refuse to let others to do your thinking, talking, and naming for you; it means learning to respect yourself and use your own brains and instincts; hence, grappling with hard work. And don't fall for shallow and easy solutions-predigested books and ideas, weekend encounters guaranteed to change your life, taking "gut" courses instead of ones you know will challenge you, bluffing at school and life instead of doing solid work. Have the courage to be 'different', which means women should be able to demand from others- parents, friends,roommates,teachers, lovers, husband and children to respect their sense of purpose and their integrity as persons. Don't sit in passive silence even when you disagree inwardly with everything that is being said around you.
Women's students demand to be taken seriously' , because they also have the inborn potentialities so the teachers must be committed  to the belief that women's minds and experiences are basically valuable and unavoidable to any civilization worthy the name. Clear thinking, active discussion, and excellent writing are all necessary for intellectual freedom, and that these require hard work. This means seeking out criticism, recognizing that the most affirming thing anyone can do for Rich claims that everything one learns reflects how men have perceived history and experiences.

2. Critically evaluate Adrienne Rich's concept of education?
The fundamental principle in Adrienne Rich’s article is that women, as students should not receive an education, but to claim one. Claiming an education sounds a lot like taking what’s rightfully yours. Do you receive an education for society or does society present it for a student to take? Rich seems to think that education is presented for those willing to claim it. She powerfully says that “The first thing I want to say to you who are students, is that you cannot afford to think of being here to receive an education; you will do much better to think of yourselves as being here to claim one.”
Rich explains that even all women colleges are ran by men. This seems interesting because Rich is encouraging women to claim their education.
Claiming something from my perspective means to take and not look back. Receiving means that someone may have to given something they have away. If women were teachers and administrators, women would feel better about receiving an education from another woman. But unfortunately very few women are working in administration field. Rich’s argument is summed up when she informs the reader that the idea of claiming an education can be embraced by any sex, race, color or creed. Rich instruct that take responsibility to yourself and refusing to let others do your thinking, talking and naming for you; so you will learning to respect and use your own brains and instincts; hence, grappling with hard work.
She says that education is not for everyone but it is there for the ones willing to take it. Rich provokes her reader by letting telling them to discover their own journey to education. She finally says to the women student that they should not sell their talents and aspirations cheaply. They should have the courage to demand from others to respect their sense of purpose and their integrity as persons.  Because we live in a society that embraces abstract thinking and making something out of nothing. Rich’s article is even reflected in this day and age.

No Tears

No Tears

By
Alexander pushkin

Under the blue skies of her native land
She languished and began to fade...
Until surely there flew without a soundAbove me, her young shade.
But  there  stretches between us an uncrossable  line;
In vain my  feelings  I  tried to awaken.
The  lips that  brought  the  news were made of  stone,
And  I  listened like  a  stone, unshaken.
So this is she  for  whom  my soul once burned
In the  tense  and heavy  fire,
Obsessed, exhausted, driven out of my mind
By tenderness and desire!
Where  are  the  torments?  Where is love? Alas!
For  the  un returning  days'
Sweet  memory  and for  the  poor credulous
Shade,  I find no lament, no tears.

Introduction to the poem
‘ No  Tears ’  is  a  lyrical poem in  which  a  lover  speaks at the death  of  his  beloved. This poem is  not written  in the  expected elegiac  mood  and it  surprises us lament, no tears”.About the author :Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin (1799-1837) was a Russian author of the Romantic era who is considered by many to be the greatest Russian poet and the founder of modern Russian literature. He was born into an aristocratic family of Moscow. At a very early age, he became acquainted with the classics and exhibited talent in creative writing. Pushkin published his first poem at the age of fifteen and was widely recognized by the literary establishment by the time of his graduation from the imperial Lyceum in Tsarskoye Selo. In 1820 he published his first long poem, Ruslan and Lyudmila amidst much controversy about its subject and style. 
Summary
The  lover  says  that  far  away  from  him,  in  her  native  land,  his  young  beloved  slowly withered away.  Eventually,  her  soul  departed  from  her  body  and  flew  away  into  the  sky.    Now  there  is  a  line between  the  worlds  of  the  living  and  the  dead  (the  lover  and  his  beloved)  which  he  could  not  cross.    The lover  tried  to  rouse  his  emotions  for  her  but  it  was  in  vain.    The  person  who  brought  the  news  of  her  death showed  no emotion.    The  poet  listened  to  the  news  unmoved  like  a  stone. The  lover  says  that  it  is  the  same  lady  for  whom  his heart  once  used  to  burn  in  the  scorching  heat of  the  intensity  of  their  love.    Immersed  fully  in  the  pangs  that  love  kindled,  he  was  often  driven  out  of  his mind  because  of  the  desire  for  his  beloved.  The  poet  asks  himself  where  all  those  ardent  feelings  have gone.    Now  his  heart  is  barren, devoid  of  all  love.  He confesses  that  he  has  no tears for  her. The  sweet memories  of their  good  old  days  or  the poor  helpless  spirit,  fail  to produce  any  grief  in  him. 
1. Why is the poet sure that the spirit has flown above him?The poet believes that the spirit has flown above him because his beloved 's soul had departed from her body.
2. What  is the ‘uncrossable line’ that  the  poet  refers to?
The  poet  refers to the uncrossable  line  between the worlds of  the  living  and the dead.
3. “And  I  listened like  a stone, unshaken”. Identify  and define  the  figure  of  speech?
The  figure  of  speech  used  is simile. Simile  is  an explicit comparison  between  two different things, actions, or  feelings, using  the  words  ‘as’  or ‘like’.
4. Find the  rhyme  scheme  of the poem?
The  rhyme  scheme  of  the poem is abab cdcd  efef  ghgh.
Paragraph question and answers :
1. How does the poet describes the death of his lover?
The poet describes the death of his lover in a quiet different way. He  listened  to  the  news of  her death  with dead emotions. He  tried  to  awaken  his feelings  for  her,  but  it  was in  vain. She died in her native land, far away from him. The poet is certain that her spirit must have flown above him by saying bid farewell to him. Then the poet describes about an uncrossable line between the worlds of the living and the dead. The sweet memories of their good old days or the poor helpless spirit, fail to produce any grief in him.
2. The  poet  mourns  for  the lost  love  rather  than  the death  of  his  beloved. Do you agree? Substantiate  your  answer with reasons?
The  poet  speaks  at  the  death of  his  beloved.    The  news  of his  beloved’s  death  did  not make any  feelings  in  him. He tried to  rouse  his  emotions for her,  but  it  was  in  vain. There  was  a time  when  her very thought  excited  his  heart. He was  often  driven  out  of  his mind  because of  the  desire  for his beloved.  Now  that  she  is dead , feelings the  poet  wonders where  all  those ardent  have gone. Now  his  heart  is barren, devoid  of  all  love. He confesses  that  he  has no tears left  for  her. This change in the lover  after  his beloved’s  death shows  that  he mourns for  the lost  love rather than the  death of  his beloved. 
Essay
1. Discuss the  emotional sincerity  and honesty  that Pushkin expresses in the  poem.
Alexander  Pushkin’s No  Tears is a  lyrical poem  where  a  lover speaks  at  the  death of  his beloved. Not  written  in  the expected  elegiac  mood,  the poem surprises  us with  the honest statement, “I  find  no lament, no tears”. The  poet  does  not  feel sad  at  his  beloved’s  death. He listened  to  the  news  of  her death  without  any  feeling. He tried  to  awaken  his  feelings for  her,  but  it  was  in vain.    The poet  reminisces  about the days  of  courtship,  when  his heart  used  to  burn  in  the scorching heat  of  the  intensity of  their  love. Immersed  fully in  the  pangs  that  love kindled,  he  was often  driven out  of  his  mind  because  of the  desire  for  his  beloved. But  after  her  death  he has lost  all  such sensations. The poet  wonders  where  all  those intense  and  passionate  feelings have  gone. Now his  heart  is barren,  devoid  of  all  love. He openly  confesses  that  he  has not  tears left  for  her. In this poem, Pushkin expresses the lover’s f eeling  with emotional sincerity  and honesty.

Refugee Mother and Child

Refugee Mother and Child

By
Chinua Achebe


Chinua Achebe’s Mother in a Refugee Camp, paints the pathetic picture of a mother holding her dying son in her hands for the last time, portraying both the inevitability of death and the pain of those whose loved ones have died yet they live on in a harsh light.

The poem

No Madonna and Child could touch
that picture of a mother's tenderness
for a son she soon will have to forget.
The air was heavy with odors of diarrhea of unwashed children
with washedout ribs and dried up
bottoms struggling in labored
steps behind bloup wn empty bellies. Most
mothers there had long ceased
to care but not this one;she held
a ghost smile between her teeth
and in her eyes the ghost of a mother's pride as she combed the rustcolored
hair left on his skull and then
singing in her eyes-- began carefully
to part it...In another life
this would have been a little daily
act of no consequence before his breakfast and school; now she
did it like putting flowers
on a tiny grave.




About the poet
Chinua Achebe (1930 – 2013) is one of Nigeria and Africa’s most recognised and decorated writers. He is more renown for his novels and essays. He came to limelight as a poet and was joint-winner of the Common wealth Poetry Prize in 1972. Chinua Achebe continues to be an inspiration to several people around the world.

Introduction
In Refugee Mother and Child, Achebe realistically presents a refugee camp infected with starvation, disease and death.
The mother and child are nameless so is the location. They can be any mother and child in Africa, driven to refugee camp because of political instability.

Summary
The poem starts with the poet comparing the scene of a mother holding her son in a refugee camp with the love and care which is usually depicted in all versions of Mary holding a ding Jesus in her arms. The poet state that none of the reputed depictions of tenderness could even come near the fragility and beauty of this scene of pathos and heartbreak. This foreshadows that the son in her arms is soon going to die, an idea which is confirmed by the third line which says that after laying her son beneath the earth, the mother would have to learn how to live life without him, and move on.

The next four lines describe the aura of disease, illness and death which surrounds the camp; describing the smells of the camp, and the ribs of the children protruding from sickness, painting a truly horrifying picture of sick infants and helpless people. Then Achebe goes on to say how other mothers no longer care, they can no longer cope with the struggle of surviving and now only await death. However this mother, who was mentioned earlier, do not fall into the same category. There is a remnant of a smile gracing her lips and she remembers her son in all his glory as she holds him for the last time. Her maternal pride had led her to clean him up before laying him to rest, and now she takes out a comb and with singing eyes, she arranges her son’s hair which is rust, a sign that he suffers from kwashiorkor; a protein deficiency. The relevant way in which she performs this act makes the poet reflect on how in normal day to day life, such an act holds no consequence to any mother; they do it before their sons leave for school. But the manner in which this mother does it has such an air of finality to it that it is akin to laying flowers on a tiny grave.

Questions and answers

1. Why is the picture of the refugee mother and her child more tender than Madonna and child?
The refugee mother cares her child with great affection even in the midst of poverty and miseries. This makes the poet think that their picture is more tender than Madonna and child.

2. How does the poet paint the sufferings of the people in the camp?
The air in the refugee camp held nauseating odours of diarrhea and unwashed children. Their ribs stuck out and they walked laboriously with their distended bellies. Through this picture the poet brings out the sufferings of the refugee children and the total helplessness of the situation.

3. “Most mothers had long ceased to care”. Why?
Most mothers in the refugee camp ceased to care their children, as the poignancy of the situation of the refugees had reached their saturation point. They had lost their all hope of survival.

4. How is the combing of the child's hair similar to putting flowers on a grave?
The mother is watching her child dying. Her lost of survival and her act of love and kindness towards her dying child. So the combing of the child's hair is similar to putting flowers on a grave.

Paragraph

1. Comment on the structure of the poem.
The success of the poem lies within the structure and the poet’s ability to present the pain of all those mother who sees the death of her child. Achebe’s own literary language is blended in with images and descriptions that create a sense of compassion for the unfortunate refugees. He skillfully contrasted the imagery of life and death, using irony of singing in the mother’s eyes and cleverly foreshadowing. And adding some literary devices such as alliteration, contracts, imagery, tones and symbols the poet proficiently specifies the ultimate destinies of the protagonists in the poem.

2. How does the juxtaposition of two pictures heighten the emotional appeal of the poem?
Juxtaposition means an act or instance of placing an idea or event close together or side by side, especially for comparison or contrast. There are two pictures heighten the emotional appeal in the poem. First one is the poet draws our attention to a refugee mother and her child image which remind us another statue, that of the Madonna holding her dead son after the crucifixion. There is immense tenderness and passion in both scenes. But the poet says that the refugee mother was more worried than Madonna.
The second picture is about a mother who is combing the hair of her child with great affection and care. Here the refugee mother combing the hair of her dying child, at the same time it would be different if it is a normal day means she would be combing the hair before her child leave for school. The emotional appeal heighten by using a day today activity is really remarkable one.

Write an essay of 300 words

1. Refugee Mother and Child is a celebration of motherhood. Explain.
The poem starts with the poet comparing the scene of a mother holding her son in a refugee camp with the love and care which is usually depicted in all versions of Mary holding a dying Jesus in her arms. The poet state that none of the reputed depictions of tenderness could even come near the fragility and beauty of this scene of pathos and heartbreak.

The next four lines describe the aura of disease, illness and death which surrounds the camp; describing the smells of the camp, and the ribs of the children protruding from sickness, painting a truly horrifying picture of sick infants and helpless people. Then Achebe goes on to say how other mothers no longer care, they can no longer cope with the struggle of surviving and now only await death. However this mother, who was mentioned earlier, do not fall into the same category. There is a remnant of a smile gracing her lips and she remembers her son in all his glory as she holds him for the last time. Her maternal pride had led her to clean him up before laying him to rest, and now she takes out a comb and with singing eyes, she arranges her son’s hair which is rust, a sign that he suffers from protein deficiency. The relevant way in which she performs this act makes the poet reflect on how in normal day to day life, such an act holds no consequence to any mother; they do it before their sons leave for school. But the manner in which this mother does it has such an air of finality to it that it is akin to laying flowers on a tiny grave.

The poem is full of pathos and the agony of a mother who has to witness her child’s death in front of her eyes is made clear with the use of the initial comparison to the Holy mother Mary and Jesus. The finality of death is evident in this comparison even as the poet himself says that the tenderness of this scene in reality far outshines any that is depicted in all the versions of ‘Madonna and Child.’ Then the strong imagery which is used to describe the setting, the refugee camp, brings out the desolation surrounding the poem. Achebe evokes the sense of smell, sight and feeling to such an extent that tears spring to the reader’s eyes. The metaphor in the mother’s ‘humming eyes’ makes one sympathize with her plight.

No reason is given as to why the people are in a refugee camp. Perhaps there had been a war, or some sort of natural calamity, but Achebe has aptly described how such drastically the lives of those change who are forced to leave their home and take shelter, by focusing on one mother who is holding her dying child. The poem could also act as a testament to a mother’s love, who knows that the child is dead, yet continues to hold him with care and caution. She is not yet ready to let go and accept the fact that he is dead.