The Gardener

The Gardener

-Rudyard Kipling

Characters:

Helen Turrell: Unwed mother; she was quite ashamed of the society as she was pregnant; she lied that she was going France for treatment

Michael Turrell: Son who got birth in France 

Summary of the story “The Gardener”:

When Helen Turrell became pregnant she was ashamed because she was not married. She left her home in England to have the baby in the south of France. When she returned to England, she pretended that the baby was really her brother’s child. The brother, George, lived in India but he had died falling off his horse. This meant that Helen had to look after the child. Helen told other lies. She said that she had to go to the south of France because she was ill. She said the child had been born in India, but had been brought to the south of France by a nurse who had been dismissed when the child became ill, and she also said that she had given the child’s mother some money.

The child was called Michael. Helen didn’t tell him that she was his real mother. She said that she was his aunt, and that he was her nephew. Michael was sent to a private school. At school, he was told that he was born outside mirage /illusion/ vision.

When the First World War began, Michael joined the army. He did not have to do much fighting, but he was killed by an exploding shell that completely buried his body. After the war, Michael was reburied in a huge cemetery in Belgium.

After that, Helen decided to visit the grave of Michael. On her way to cemetery, she met a woman named Mrs Scarsworth, who said that she visited graves for her friends who could not come herself. She took photographs of the graves. Late at night, Mrs Scarsworth came into Helen’s hotel room. She said that she was telling lies. Her real reason for visiting the cemetery was to visit the grave of someone special to her (probably a secret lover).

On the next morning, Helen visited the cemetery. It was huge; there were thousands of black crosses that all looked the same. Helen did not know how she would find her son’s grave. A gardener approached her. Helen said that she was looking for her nephew’s grave. The gardener said he would show her the grave of her son.  

1. What is the real relation between Helen Turrell and Michael?

There is no doubt that the relationship between Helen and Michael is that of mother and son. Helen was the mother of Michael. But, as she was an unwed mother, she was ashamed and so she did not declare it. She only said that Michael was the son of her brother, who had died in India. She also told that she had managed to bring the child from India only to rear him up.

2. What is the truth behind each of the lies Helen tells the village at the beginning of the story? Why does she tell these lies?

Ans: As Helen was an unwed mother, she was ashamed of the fact and she did not tell the truth to her villagers. Rather, she told different lies. Some of the lies told by her are as follows:

            i) She had to go to France for treatment.

           ii) Michael was her nephew and that his father was George Turrell.

          iii) George had died a few days before Michael’s birth.

         iv) Michael was born in India and Helen had given some money to Michael’s mother to get the child.

          v) Michael was brought from India to France by a nurse but as the nurse was careless, Helen had dismissed her.

                The truth behind all these lies was very simple. She herself was Michael’s mother. So, there was no question of either giving any money to Michael’s mother or dismissing any nurse. She had no disease. She hadn’t gone to France for any treatment. She had gone there to give birth to the child.   

 3. How do we know who the gardener really is?

There are many explorations to the question: who the gardener was. Some people say that he was only an employee. Some others say that he was Michael’s father, who was working there only to live by the grave of Michael. He said ‘son’ rather than ‘nephew’ while leading her to the grave.

But, I think that the gardener was Lord Christ himself. I think so only because the write says that there was infinite compassion / endless love in his eyes. No human being can have such an infinite compassion except the God. So, the gardener was Jesus Christ. If it’s so, we can also guess that the Lord had forgiven Helen for her crime. 

In Bed

In Bed

-Joan Didion

Subject Matter: Migraine headache

                                 Personal Example of the writer

                                 About medical information for migraine

Migraine: [extremely bad headache] a recurrent, throbbing, very painful headache,

                   often affecting one side of the head and sometimes accompanied by

                    vomiting or by distinct warning signs including visual disturbances.

Symptoms of Migraine Headache:

                i) Headache is not continuous if it occurs it lasts long.

               ii) Migraine attack occurs almost four to five times in a month.

              iii) Flush (blush or redness) of blood in cerebral / brainy arteries / blood vessels.

              iv) Vision is not clear (temporarily blind)

               v) Mild hallucinations / false sense perceptions / illusion / nightmare

              vi) Gastrointestinal / stomach / digestive / gastric disturbance

             vii) Overpowering fatigue / exhaustion, tiredness, weariness, weakness, lethargy, etc.

            viii) Aphasia / lack of language abilities

              ix) Chilling / sweating

         x) Nausea / sickness of the stomach / the unsettling feeling in the stomach that accompanies the urge to vomit

  

Causes of Migraine Headache Attack:

                i) Stress

                ii) Allergy

                iii) Fatigue

                iv) Abrupt Change in atmosphere

                v) Flashing Light

                vi) Decrease of serotonin (neurotransmitter chemical) in blood

Difference of Headache and Migraine Headache:

                Aura: a distinctive sensation or visual disturbance that may signal the beginning of a migraine headache

   Aura Period: the period in which symptoms are shown.

Common Headache

                                i) It has no symptoms in aura period.

                                ii) It’s not disease and can be cured or treated.

                                iii) It’s not physiological (body’s internal processes)error.

                                iv) It’s not hereditary error.

                                v) Ordinary headache

                                vi) It has no aura period.

                                vii) Pain killer works.

Migraine Headache:

                                i) It has symptoms in aura period of 15 to 20 minutes.

                                ii) It’s disease and can’t be cured.

                                iii) Migraine is a physiological error.

                                iv) Migraine headache is hereditary error.

                                v) Migraine is chemical disturbance in serotonin hormone which is in brain.

                                vi) It has aura period.

                                vii) Pain killer doesn’t work.

The writer has chills, sweating, nausea, debility / weakness in her migraine headache.

Non migraine patients think that the migraine patients are acting in the name of headache. They think that the headache can be cured by taking painkillers but in fact no painkillers act for migraine headache.

Perfectionist: Person who does each work in his or her life perfectly.

Ironically, the writer has said that migraine headache attack gives remedy of stress. 

Summary of the essay “In Bed”:

The essay “In Bed” is an essay about the writer’s experiences with migraine. A migraine is a very painful headache. People who suffer from migraine can have the attacks very often. The writer has migraine attacks three or four times in every month. Sometimes, she even has five times in a month. If she is unable to take drugs in the aura period, she will be able to function perhaps one day in four. She has been a patient of migraine from her childhood. In the beginning, she used to be ashamed of accepting that she was a patient of migraine. She used to think that people would think that she had bad attitudes. But, later on, she came to know that there is nothing to be ashamed of migraine. It’s not a weakness of personality but it’s only a physiological error.

The basic difference between common headache and migraine headache:

Migraines are not like common headaches. There are certain basic differences between the two. In other words, migraine headaches are different from common headache. To begin with migraine headaches are inherited whereas common headaches are not. Thus, common headache is not a disease but migraine is. Migraines have an aura period but common headaches do not have any. Common headache can be cured by taking painkillers but if migraine headache starts, no painkiller can work. But, it can be prevented if drugs are taken in the aura period. Migraines have different symptoms in different people but common headaches don’t have any symptoms. The writer is a patient of migraine because both her grandmothers and both her parents had migraine. Migraine is a physiological error but common headache is not. Migraine is caused by a hormone called serotonin. When the amount of it in the blood falls sharply, migraine headache starts but common headache does not have any such chemistry. Migraines are not cured. They can be prevented by taking drugs in the aura period. But, if once the actual headache starts, it goes on continuously for longer hours. Such headaches are very strong and unpleasant.

What are the misconceptions about migraine by normal people?

The writer complains that people don’t take migraines seriously. There are some misconceptions about migraine, and the writer wants to correct them. Many people think that migraines are imaginary. They think that migraine patients make themselves ill by worrying too much. Some people even think that the migraine patients do not take pain killers and do not try to get relief knowingly. All these are misconceptions. The reality is that migraine is not the result of any wrong thinking. Migraine headaches are severe and intolerable. No pain killer has any effect on the migraine headache. In this reference, she says that it’s good that her husband also is a patient of migraine. This helps them to have a good understanding.

Some doctors talk about migraine personality. This is a type of personality which makes migraines more likely. A migraine patient is likely to be a perfectionist. But, the writer thinks that all the perfectionists are not the migraine patients. The writer herself is not a perfectionist but she’s a migraine patient. It is more important that the cause of migraine is biological. It’s passed from parents to their children.

What intellectual response does she have toward her own migraines?

Joan Didion has learnt to live with migraine because she cannot avoid them. They begin when she is worried about something. She has developed a type of intellectual response towards migraine. When the migraine starts, she goes to bed and lets it happen. She does not fight against it. The migraine is painful but the pain helps her to get rid of all the other anxieties of life. They stop her worrying so much about the other problems of her life. When the migraine has finished, she feels better. She enjoys the beauty of the nature and thinks how lucky she is because she did not die out of the migraine headache. 

..................

This essay has given the example of migraine as an obstacle in human life. As migraine has no cure, obstacles also cannot be prevented. As the writer makes migraine her friend, we should also try to make our every obstacle (that comes in our life) our friend. We should also try to live with obstacles and shouldn't try to avoid it. Then, our obstacles wouldn't be obstacle any more.

On the Vanity of Earthly Greatness

On the Vanity of Earthly Greatness

-Arthur Guiterman

Message of the poem: We shouldn’t be proud of our achievements because every achievement is temporary. Time is the most valuable wealth and all our earthly greatness /

achievements are useless in comparison with time. Time is the leader which can make a sage the King and the King a sage. So, we shouldn’t be proud of earthly greatness as we have.

Summary of the poem “On the Vanity of Earthly Greatness”:

                The main theme of this poem is that it’s useless to be proud of our earthly greatness and achievements. These things aren’t permanent. The only permanent thing is ‘Time’. Everything else including our earthly greatness and achievements has to bow before time.

                This poem describes what happens to powerful people and animals after they die. It shows how greatness anything is, anyway it continues only for a short time. The poet has presented certain examples, which all prove the same thing. Mastodon tusks are turned to billiard balls, bears are turned into rugs, the sword of great king becomes rusted and the great rulers are turned into statues and busts (half or broken or ruined statue). In the final line, the poet indicates that his own greatness will also be short lived. 

1. Bring out the “vanity” involved in the last couplet.

                Vanity is pride / narcissism / egotism / arrogance in appearance or achievements. The poet is saying that it’s vain or useless to think that we are powerful because we leave nothing behind our death. Similarly, in the last couplet, we find it only to be vanities of the poet because he is putting himself in the same level of great rulers like, Charlemagne and Caesar.

2. What is ironical about the poem?

                Irony is a figure of speech in which words are used to show the opposite of what they appear to mean. In other words, irony is the gap between what the reality is and what it appears to be. This poem is ironical in the sense that it is not about greatness but it is about weakness. Mastodons are not mighty or powerful, bear is not potent but, in fact, their power is short lived. In this way, this poem is ironical.

The Six Million Dollar Man

The Six Million Dollar Man

-Harold J. Morowitz 

The essayist found:

                i) Human body made up of chemicals

                ii) Chemical’s quantity in our body

                iii) Price of 1 gm of each chemical 

Conclusion of the essayist: He was not cheaper but he was six million trillion man. 

Theme of the essay: Man with emotions, feelings, sensation, love, etc. is the most

                                          expensive  man. Though human body can be talked in terms of

                                          money, human being is priceless. 

Summary of the essay “The Six Million Dollar Man”:

                On his birthday, the writer got a card from his daughter and son in law which stated that the price of human body is only 97 cents. The writer was not satisfied with this definition of human body. So, he himself started to investigate the thing by himself. He consulted a catalogue which contained the names of the different chemicals which make a human body. The prices of the chemicals were written in the catalogue according to per gram. Some chemicals were cheaper whereas some chemicals were really very costly. The writer started his computation. He took his weight and subtracted from 68 % of water portion. He found that his dry weight 24,436 gm and by a further computation, he came to know that he was worth of 6 million dollars.

                He became very glad at this discovery. He had been sad at the information of 97 cents only but by his discovery, he suddenly felt that he was really a rich man. But, again he gave the whole matter a second thought. He thought that the chemicals printed in the card were only crude chemicals. So, they did cost so little. Again, the next difficulty was the price of the refined chemicals. Certainly, human body is not made up of crude chemicals but by the refined chemicals. In that case, his price was certainly not only six million dollar but six billion.

                Again, he was not satisfied and started to think in a new direction. He thought that if at all he bought all the needed chemicals and put them in a bottle and also put the bottle in a fridge and if he shook the bottle he wasn’t going to get a human body from it. Some organism was needed to change the chemicals into bones, flesh, and the other organs of the body. No such method or organism is invented yet. Even if it was invented and even if we could make a human body with the help of chemicals and the machines, the product wouldn’t speak or feel or be angry or love anyone.

                To sum up, though science can make a human body (though it’s not possible yet), science is certainly not going to make a human being. In fact, there is the difference between human body and human being. Human body can be talked in the terms of money but human being is priceless. Indeed, human being is the infinite preciousness. This is the final definition given by the writer.

Malini

Malini

-Rabindranath Tagore

Characters:

King

Queen

Malini: Hindu Princess

Kemankar: Strict, traditional Brahman who is the leader of Brahmin

Supriya: Very intimate friend of Kemankar

Brahmins

            Subject Matter: Clash between Hinduism and Buddhism

Character Sketch of Supriya:

Ø             Serious role                                                   

Ø             He seems disloyal to his friend Kemankar

Ø             So, he is more betrayer than traitor                

Ø             Doubtful character

Ø             Calm but at the same time bold also              

Ø             Not extremely furious and aggressive

Ø             Meek; humble; modest; gentle                       

Ø             Gullible / trusting / innocent / naïve

Ø             Patience                                                      

Ø             Thoughtful

Ø             Patriotic                                                      

Ø             Kindness

Ø             Sympathetic                                                

Ø             Forgiving Character

Ø             Broad-minded                                              

Ø             World-visioned or cosmopolitan

Ø             Reform-minded                                             

Ø             Uses conscience

Ø             Pragmatic or practical or realistic                  

Ø             Not hot-tempered

Ø             Graceful looks                                            

Ø             Deep-thinking

Ø             Meditative                                              

Ø            Physically: Short built     

                                   Slim

                                   Graceful          

                                   Serious looking   

                                   Sentimental      

                                   Brahmin looks 
                                   Moderate clothing  

@ From the very beginning of the novel, Supriya does not intend to banish the innocent girl.

@ He even does not believe that gathering would determine truth and reality.

@ He criticizes those scriptures which fitted their own narrow hearts.

@ He assures Kemankar that his friendship with him is older than the new religion. Anyway,  Supriya deceives his friend Kemankar.

@ Supriya is firm and determined in his action but he only doubts when he begins to debate.

@ As a whole, Supriya performs the role of betrayer because when Kemankar was warning him telling that his heart might be drawn from him by the novelty of the falsehood, at that time, Supriya assured Kemankar that falsehood may be new but their friendship was old.

@ So, Supriya proves himself to be disloyal to his friend Kemankar.

Character Sketch of Kemankar:

Ø     Determined

Ø     Rigid

Ø     Bold

Ø     Self-confident

Ø     Well-built or heavily built

Ø     Dominant voiced

Ø     Stubborn

Ø     Aggressive

Ø     Devoted Hindu

Ø     Commanding : Do or die 

Ø     Devoted to his own religion

Ø     Strong

Ø     Ready to die for his belief

Ø     Active or furious

Ø     Well-versed in holy doctrines        

Ø     Discusses about theology and god with his friend

Ø     Thinks his religion as full proof and doesn’t need any improvement or modification

Ø    Regards that one should not discard the religion of his/her forefathers simply because some new creed or faith or belief or doctrine or dogma seems noble or dignified or righteous

Ø   When Malini becomes able to influence the people of Kashi due to her novelty, he suspects her, and takes it a direct attack on Hinduism. 

Ø     Has a good leading power

Ø    Is not only able to lead the angry crowd for Malini’s banishment but is equally competent to organize army on foreign land

Ø     Thinks that the blood of Kashi is contaminated by the infiltration of new creed

Ø     For this, he is ready to turn from a common man to a commander. Thus, he seems to be a patriot in his own way

Ø    Kemankar is a good friend too but when he finds himself deceived then he takes his friend’s life without any regret as he hurts his belief.

Ø     Kemankar, as a believer, not only takes his friend’s life but is also ready to sacrifice his own life too.

Ø      Like Socrates and Christ, he is also ready to die for his own belief.

Therefore, when the king asks him, what will he do if he excuses him, then he boldly tells that he will complete his incomplete mission, i.e. to uproot the king and the royal family to regain the pure and serene image of Hindus.

Malini was Hindu but she did not like it for the following reasons:

                i) The tradition of sacrificing the animals just in the name of God.

                ii) Traditions being idealistic / impractical / unrealistic

                iii) Brahmins taking Hinduism as wrong way, i.e. Clash about castes, etc.

Supriya’s view: By the muscles, no one can establish religion.  

Analysis of the play Malini:

Malini is a princess of Kashi who follows the path of Buddhism. Brahmins take her acceptance of new religion as a threat to their religion. Infuriated / enraged / furious by it, they protest against her in front of the palace and demanding her banishment. Kemankar, leader of the protester says that woman as a threat is more dangerous than man because she cannot be defeated by arms neither can be overcome through reason because women do not possess it at all. Warning his fellow Protestants not to bow down in front of her beauty, he says:

Friends keep your resolution firm. The woman, as an enemy, is to be dreaded more than all others. For reason is futile against her and forces all ashamed; man’s power gladly surrenders itself to her powerlessness, and she takes shelter in the strongholds of our own hearts.

Supriya, one of the members of their league does not support their demand of banishing a girl. He believes that she is not a threat to their religion. Moreover, to think of saving the religion by banishing an innocent girl is sheer stupidity for him. According to him, hating others in the blindness of religion is not what religion teaches. Therefore, he says:

Of all things the blind certitude /certainty/ assurance of stupidity is hardest to bear. To think of saving your religion by banishing a girl from her home! Let me know what is her offence? Does she not maintain that truth and live are the body and soul of religion? If so, is that not the essence of all creeds / doctrines / faiths?

Amidst their discussion, one Brahmin brings the news that even the king’s army is ready to take their side openly. But, others do not like the idea of using armed force against her but believe that they can defeat her through their faith. Then, they begin their penance and recite sacred verses in order to invoke their goddess in front of the palace. They want to invoke her so that they could destroy Malini through her power. At the same time, the princess appears before them. They mistakenly take her as Goddess herself. They recognize her when she says that she is going to leave the palace. Although people feel annoyed initially, they begin to follow and regard her as Goddess when she expresses her desire to live with them to understand the nature of suffering. Supriya thinks that he has found someone whom he can take as a real God. So, he also decides to follow her. Kemankar is still firm in his decision and tries to persuade Supriya. Kemankar decides to go to foreign land and brings soldiers to fight against her. Supriya also promises to help Kemankar. Ignorant of the changed mind of the villagers, the royal family makes preparation of her banishment. When they come to know the reality, they change their mind. Supriya goes to Malini and holds chat about philosophy and religion. Malini asks help with Supriya saying that she has great responsibility of her followers. So, she needs his guidance in order to lead them to the right path. During the conversation, Supriya discloses the plan of Kemankar. He says :You made me live again in a new world of birth. “Love for all life” was a mere word, waiting from the old time to be made real, - and I saw that truth in you in flesh. My heart cried for my friend, but he was away, out of my reach; then came his letter, in which he wrote that he was coming with a foreign army at his back, to wash away the new faith in blood, and to punish you with death.

King enters into the room at the right moment with the news of Kemankar’s arrest and offers reward to Supriya for his help. It seems that he wants to give the hands of Malini to him. Malini and Supriya want king to forgive Kemankar. Kemankar is brought to their room where he still shows his firm attitude. The conversation between them goes like this:

                King: What punishment do you expect from my hands?

                Kemankar: Death.

                King: But if I pardon you?

                Kemankar: Then I shall [have] time again to complete the work I began.

Kemankar wants to see Supriya as his last wish. He tells him that only God will decide who were right in their act. After saying this, he hits Supriya with his chain and Supriya dies on the spot. Although Kemankar takes life of Supriya with hate, Malini bestows love in return. She reveals the true sense of religion and truth by saying - “Father, forgive Kemankar”.

IMPORTANT QUESTIONS:

What were the Brahmins demanding for?

Ans: Malini was a Hindu Princess but she was much interested in Buddhist religion. She did not like some of the bad aspects of Hindu religion. She particularly did not like the fact that the Brahmins misinterpreted the religion. So, her inclination was towards Buddhist religion. She used to study Buddhist literature and also used to discuss the things with monks. The Brahmins were quite afraid of it. They thought that this would be a great challenge for Hindu religion. So, they wanted Malini to stop taking interest in the Buddhist religion. Otherwise, their demand was to banish her from the country. If the King couldn’t banish his daughter, he should be abdicated. In other words, the Brahmins were demanding the banishment of Malini as she was heretic or revisionist of old religion and if the king wouldn’t banish her then he should leave the throne.

Draw the character sketch of Supriya and show how he is different from Kemankar.

Ans: Kemankar and Supriya were closed friends. They were leading the revolution together. We first meet Supriya with Kemankar when the Brahmins were protesting against Malini. All of a sudden, Malini comes there. The other Brahmins became in her side and Kemankar was left alone. Supriya was with Kemankar. Supriya is a learned man and he is not conservative like his friend. He does not like to prove the supremacy of religion by physical force. He knew that there were many drawbacks of the religion and so we find him in the favour of correcting them. He is very bold because he told all these things to the Brahmins. However, Supriya has certain weakness. His weakness is that he does not have his own standing. Till Kemankar was there, he was influenced by him and when he went in next country, he was influenced by Malini.

                As a whole, Supriya is a nice gentleman. He did not like that there should be bloodshed in the name of religion. So, he showed Kemankar’s letter to the king. He loves his friend so he repeatedly requested the king to forgive Kemankar. He is really genuine because he didn’t become ready to marry Malini.

                Though Kemankar and Supriya are closed friends. There are many differences between the two. First, Kemankar is stricter in determination than Supriya. Kemankar is more conservative. Supriya is liberal. He is ready to accept the drawbacks of his religion and the good things of other’s religion. But, Kemankar is blind to his religion.

Describe the character of Malini.

Ans: Actually, Malini was the image of love. Forgiving was the divine virtue of her. She was mediator and was impressed by Buddhism. She, getting birth in the palace, ignored the gold, dresses and ornaments. She liked serving people rather than living in a palace. She was beautiful and young. Due to her abnormal character, her mother thought her as flame of fire. People thought that she had divine power because when she came in front of the Brahmins they were influenced by her and left their demand except Kemankar. To sum up, Malini was so virtuous that she even asked pardon after Kemankar killed Supriya for his relief.

In the beginning of the play, the king talks about “storm clouds gathering over the king’s house”. What does he refer to?

Ans: The king means that due to the new creed followed by his daughter in his kingdom, the people protested about it and were going to attack the palace by combining with foreign soldiers. The storm clouds mean the danger that was nearly approaching.

What was the revolt against? Against Malini? Against King? Against Buddhism?

Ans: The revolt was against the Buddhism. All the Brahmins were follower of old creed but Malini followed the new creed which was a threat for their religion and demanded her banishment.

Why does Malini ask for her own banishment from the palace?

Ans: Malini thinks that she is born for the people but not for the palace and for king. As people demand for her banishment, she told the king that her banishment must be granted. She opines that she was made for people and for the sake of people; she is even ready to accept her banishment.

The king repeatedly asks Supriya to ask for anything he wished. Why do you think he is so insistent?

Ans: As Supriya had done a great deal of task for his country preventing the bloodshed of armies, Malini in the name of religion by showing the letter of Kemankar. So, king was too much happy having saved his kingdom, his daughter alive and made ready for the attack. Thus, he wanted to give something to Supriya for his deed and he repeatedly asked Supriya to ask something.

The play ends with Malini’s words: “Father, forgive Kemankar”. Do you think the king will forgive Kemankar?

Ans: Kemankar is king’s captive and he’s treason and king asked him what would he do after his relief then he said that he would go forward for the revolt then he wasn’t set free and inside him, there was fire in his heart and he was bold on his revolt. So, king wouldn’t forgive him at first but if Malini would request him repeatedly and if Kemankar would be changed then he might forgive Kemankar.