• Celebrating Holi Festival at home in Butwal.

    Celebrating festivals is a part of preserving culture. It makes us strong and helps to transfer the culture and tradition to the generation. I celebrated the festivel with my kids and wife at home in Butwal, Nepal.

  • Working at school with colleagues

    We conduct differnt programs and activities at school. I involved with other colleagues to such extra curricular activities at my work place.

  • Visiting new places for research and entertainment

    Visiting different places makes refreshed. I like to visit different places to get entertainment in my ledgure time. It helps to develop internal tourise.

  • Taking part at General Election 2017.

    It is my responsibility to fulfil the task assigned by Nepal government and related authority. I involved in the election of the parliament of Nepal.

"A 1996 Commencement Speech" by Salman Rushdie

 A 1996 Commencement Speech

-Salman Rushdie

About the Author

Salman Rushdie (1947-) was born in India. He is a British-Indian novelist and essayist. He is popularly known for his second novel, "Midnight's Children (1981), and his fourth novel, "The Satanic Verses (1988). His style is mostly based on magical realism and historical reality.  Most of his works are about diasporic, imaginary homelands, connection, disruption, and migration between the people from the East and the West. He is also one of the influential post-colonial critics.

Summary

Salman Rushdie, as an Indian writer, shares his bitter experience with his students at Bard College, in the USA, during the Commencement Speech on Graduation Day. Rushdie was invited to deliver the 1996 Commencement Speech at Bard College. Rushdie addresses the members of the class of 1996. He criticizes himself and Cambridge University and shares his bitter experience of his own Graduation Day of 1968 with his students, and also regrets compromising with falsehood and injustice in the past

In 1968, Rushdie graduated from Cambridge University, the year of great student protests. He was associated with the protest, although he was not involved in the protest himself. Just a few days before Graduation Day, some of his friends threw a bucketful of thick brown gravy and onion sauce all over the walls, furniture, clothes, and recorder in the absence of Rushdie.

Rushdie was accused of such work and declared to be disqualified from the degree. The condition was that unless he submitted the report of the incident, he would not be declared eligible for his degree. So, he says, although Cambridge University prides itself on the tradition of fairness and justice, it solely accused him of the mischief and made him pay up.

On Commencement Day, Rushdie went to the ceremony with brown shoes, which were not allowed. He was immediately held and sent back to alter his shoes. Rushdie altered his shoes and returned a few minutes later. He decided to surrender in the face of injustice. Rushdie paid up for the damage and compromised with injustice. Rushdie bowed his head to the feet of the Vice-Chancellor.

There were no other options left for him. He followed and did whatever they told him because the degree he was going to receive was the product of his hard work. He accepted slavery and autocracy. In the end, he achieved his B.A. Degree from Cambridge University.

In 1996, Rushdie, as a Commencement Speaker, addressed the graduating students and shared all his experiences with them. He tells them not to accommodate injustice and not to bow their head to have their rights. He advises that they should not tolerate it if people accuse them of abuse when they are innocent. He urges them to stand up and fight for their rights and justice.

We have nothing good to learn from God. The men and women have made the world. They have made it despite their gods. Human beings have best expressed their humanity by going against the gods. The gods are weakened by their show of strength, whereas human beings grow stronger even if they are destroyed. Human beings can be happy, creative, competitive, and loving, too. Finally, Rushdie suggests that "We human beings must not bow our heads; rather, we must ignore the gods."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Selected Question-Answers from A 1996 Commencement Speech

Rushdie says that the Colleges of Cambridge pride themselves on the "ancient tradition of fairness and justice." Does he mean what he says or is he being sarcastic? Please explain your answer.

Rushdie says that the Colleges of Cambridge pride themselves on the ancient tradition of fairness and justice. In fact, he is being sarcastic about the traditional system of college administration, organizing commencement days, and distributing certificates. Rushdie had to pay the college for somebody else's mistreatment in his room, so he was punished for not wearing the right shoes and would be disqualified for the degree if he had not accepted such injustice.

It is the truth that Rushdie credits his experiences at Cambridge University more than he credits his degree in history. He says, "Throughout my life, no one has ever asked me what kind of degree I got or even if I've got one at all. I've to say it's been useless." Rushdie regrets compromising with falsehood and injustice in the past. He supplicates, bowing his head to the fact of injustice just for achieving a B. A. Degree. Therefore, he suggests his students never bow their heads before falsehood, injustice, unfairness, slavery, and autocracy.

What does Rushdie mean when he says that "Defiance is an inevitable and essential aspect of what we call freedom?" Do you agree with him? Have you ever defied anyone? If so, please recount that specific episode from your own life.

I partly agree with Rushdie on defiance as an inevitable and essential aspect of what we call freedom. Freedom begins with an act of defiance. We need defiance to enjoy our rights and freedom. We should defy those who suppress us and force us to comply with injustice. We should never bow our heads before falsehood, injustice, unfairness, slavery, and autocracy. Similarly, we should defy God to create love, creativity, and humanity.

On the other hand, defiance of all the orders, rules, and regulations of the organization results in anarchy and chaos. Therefore, we must respect and obey certain rules, laws, and systems that are for all common people,

I have had a bitter experience in my life when I bowed my head in front of injustice and the conservative system of the society when I was studying at the +2 level. I had a good relationship and love with Susmita, my classmate who was from a lower caste. As we were classmates, we used to go to and return from college together. On holidays, I used to go to her house, where all her family members used to love me a lot. I was so pleased with them. One day I invited her to come to my house, but my family members and society ignored and criticized our relationship. Later, I was forced to leave that college and join another college just because of caste discrimination.

Despite his scathing criticisms of Cambridge and himself, is Rushdie bitter or grateful for the education he received at Cambridge? Please support your answer with specific passages from the text.

During his Commencement Speech on the occasion of Graduation Day at Bard College, the USA, in 1996, Rushdie expresses scathing criticism of Cambridge Colleges and his own passivity in the face of unfairness and injustice. He makes a bitter satire against the college run by the traditional system, injustice, autocracy, and slavery. He inspires his students never to accept injustice and autocracy, but to fight for their own rights and freedom

However, Rushdie is very much grateful for the education he received from Cambridge University. He says, "Cambridge University, where I was so happy for three marvelous years, and room which I gained so much...." He says that we learn to be tolerant and open to new ideas. The experiences he received from Cambridge University are more useful and important. Finally, Rushdie appreciates his experiences more than his Degree from Cambridge University in history.

 

"Surely You are Joking, Mr. Feyman" Summary and analysis.

 SURELY YOU'RE JOKING, MR. FEYNMAN

-Feynman & Leighton

Background of Richard Feyman: 

Richard Feynman was born in 1918 and passed away in 1988. He was a renowned American physicist celebrated for his groundbreaking contributions to quantum mechanics, particularly the path integral formulation and quantum electrodynamics, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1965. His innovative use of Feynman diagrams provided intuitive visual representations for complex subatomic interactions. Beyond his theoretical work, Feynman was instrumental in the development of the atomic bomb and played a key role in investigating the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. He was one of the greatest theoretical physicists of the 20th century.

Main Points of the Essay:

ü  When Mr. Feynman committed a social error during a tea party organized by the Dean of his college, then he learned to behave correctly in a social gathering.

ü  In the beginning, he used to sit only with groups of physics, but when he started sitting with a group of other disciplines like zoology and biology  he became the top student in the college.

ü  This essay tries to say that a lot of fun, different kinds of interests in different disciplines, and interdisciplinary approaches are the key to successful learning. This essay recounts Feynman's life through his childhood education. He appears confident, interesting, and inspiring. He discovers that he is a great artist, musician, scientist, and critic, too. 

ü  The essay talks about the importance of a sociocultural environment that directly influences learning.

ü  People who are talented and genuine can adjust to any corner of the world by exploring and using their knowledge.

ü  The essay suggests that if we work hard and understand the value of time, we will achieve the destination of our life.

 

Summary:

"Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman" is Richard Feynman's autobiography. It is based on the writer's experience with his college education regarding knowledge and methods. The title of the essay itself captures the point Feynman is trying to make about life and education. The writer claims that knowledge must be based on scientific methods and that it must be gained through an interdisciplinary approach. This essay tries to show that the traditional method of learning is baseless and misleading. Furthermore, a talented and genuine man can adjust anywhere in the world. Interest is the most important motivation in education, and what and how one learns can be measured.

Richard P. Feynman was a Physics student who completed his undergraduate from MIT, America. He loved his institution so much that he wanted to graduate from there. However, Prof. Slater did not accept his enrolment because Feynman had to find out what and how the rest of the world was going and doing. So, according to the suggestion of Prof Slater, he decided to go to Princeton College for graduation.

He went to Princeton College with his father by car. He also got a room there. He stayed in the hostel with his friends. The college looked like an imitation of Oxford University and Cambridge University. One day, the Dean of Princeton College, Prof. Eisenhart, organised a Tea Party to welcome the new students. Feynman was not very familiar with the culture and manners of such social gatherings. He got confused about how to behave and where to sit. Mr. Feynman was asked if he liked cream or lemon tea. But he replied that he would like both. Listening to his reply, all the people started laughing. At the same time, Mrs Eisenhart commented, “Surely, you are joking, Mr. Feynman!” 

Gradually, Feynman learned the manners of social gatherings at Princeton College. Then, he started going to the tea party and dinner parties as well. In the very beginning, he used to sit in the physics students’ group, but later he started sitting with groups of biologists, zoologists, and philosophers. Mr. Feynman became a talented and genuine student among the college students. He understood the importance of an interdisciplinary approach in learning. So, he realized why Princeton College was right for him.

He started to take part in philosophical discussions and sometimes in biological groups, as well as physics classes. He spent lots of time on biological work. He also did research on a phase and discovered the double mutation process. His discovery made him popular among biology students. Later, he was invited to Harvard University to give a lecture on biology. Despite his hard work and discovery of new things in biology, he could not be satisfied. Though he knew and did a lot about biology and other subjects, his actual interest was in physics. So, he expected to go back to physics sooner.

Mr. Feynman had many opportunities to gain knowledge in different disciplines during his graduation from Princeton College. He got a golden opportunity to observe a cyclotron (An accelerator that imparts energies of several million electron volts to rapidly moving particles) and how it works. He was also invited to conduct a seminar on Biology by Prof. Watson at Harvard University.  So, he gave a lecture to the Biology students at Harvard University. Although Mr Feynman was a physics student, he learned a lot of things and gained experience in Biology. He loves physics more, but equally, he prefers to gain knowledge from different disciplines.

 

"TV can be a Good Parent", Summary and analysis

 TV CAN BE A GOOD PARENT

-Ariel Gore, USA (1970)

Summary

ü In TV Can Be a Good Parent, Ariel Gore responds to guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), which recommend that children under two, and especially babies and toddlers, should avoid television because it may harm their brain development and impede healthy social, emotional, and cognitive growth.

ü Gore admits that in an ideal world, direct interaction between parents (or caregivers) and children is best.

ü But she argues that for many parents, especially single mothers, poor working mothers, or those without enough support, the recommendation to avoid TV is unrealistic and ignores their difficult circumstances.

ü Drawing from her own life, she explains that when she was a child, there was no TV; childcare was communal, neighbours and friends helped each other, and rent was low. But now social and economic conditions have changed: she has to work to survive, rents are high, and there’s no community support.

ü In such a context, television sometimes becomes the only “co-parent” possible. On days when she is away or overwhelmed, she lets her child watch educational or children’s programmes (for example, shows similar to “Big Bird” or “Barney the Dinosaur”), rather than leaving a child unsupervised. She claims that TV, when used responsibly, can occupy some parenting roles and give her the breathing space she needs to manage life.

ü However, Gore does not unconditionally support the TV: she criticizes violent or mindless programming. She argues that what matters is which TV programmes children watch, and under what circumstances, not simply a blanket ban on TV.

ü Moreover, she links the debate to larger systemic issues: lack of living-wage jobs, insufficient welfare or childcare support, the high cost of rent, and the disappearance of communal child-care networks, all of which make a strict “no-TV” rule unrealistic and unfair to disadvantaged families.

ü In short: Gore doesn’t claim TV is perfect. Rather, she contends that for certain parents under social and economic pressure, TV can serve as a practical and better-than-nothing co-parent, especially when there is no alternative childcare support.

In Nepal, many families (especially in urban or semi-urban areas) struggle with economic hardship, migration (parents going abroad), nuclear families, etc. As a result, some children grow up with limited supervision or attention. The question “Is TV always harmful?” might be too rigid. Perhaps, as Gore suggests, what kind of content children watch, and how often, matters more than a blanket ban.

Critical Analysis:

I find Gore’s argument valuable and humane because she draws attention to structural inequality, economic pressure, and social realities, often ignored in “idealistic” parenting advice. Her personal experience gives weight to the idea that for many working or single mothers, TV is not just entertainment but a coping mechanism, a companion, a substitute when nothing else is available.

However, I also believe that ideals should remain ideal: children, especially in their formative years, need real people: parents, caregivers, community, peer play, and conversation. Media and TV should be considered a support, not a replacement. The goal should be to reduce reliance on TV through social change: better wages, community support networks, accessible childcare, etc.

 

Comprehension Questions (Short Answers)

1. What does the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend regarding TV for young children?

Answer: The AAP recommends that children, especially those under two years, should avoid watching television because it may harm early brain and social development. TV is not a substitute for real parent-child interaction.

2. Why does Gore believe the "no-TV rule" is unrealistic for many parents?

Answer: Gore argues it is unrealistic because many parents, especially single and low-income working mothers, lack community support, affordable housing, and sufficient childcare. TV becomes a practical co-parent when no one else is available.

3. What kind of TV programmes does Gore approve for children?

Answer: She approves educational and child-friendly shows that teach values, use gentle language, and help learning and imagination. She rejects violent, shallow, or meaningless programmes.

4. How does Gore compare her childhood parenting environment to her daughter's?

Answer: Gore grew up without TV but with strong community care, low rent, and shared parenting support. Her daughter grows up in a costly, isolated, and busy world where parents must work, and community support is rare; hence, TV fills the gap.

5. According to Gore, what should be questioned more: TV itself or the content of TV?

Answer: She believes the content and context of watching TV should be questioned, not television itself. Responsible and selective use matters more than prohibition.

 

Critical Thinking Questions (Long Answer Questions):

6. Do you agree with the title “TV can be a good parent”? Give reasons.

Answer: I partially agree. Gore uses the term “good parent” metaphorically to mean that TV can act as a support system, not a biological parent. In real life, TV sometimes keeps children safely engaged when parents are overwhelmed or working. Educational shows can foster language learning, moral values, and curiosity.

However, TV cannot replace personal care, emotional bonding, conversation, or social learning that children gain from active human interaction. Therefore, TV can be a helper, temporary guardian, or co-parent, but not a complete parent. The main idea is that support systems for working parents must improve so TV doesn’t become the only option.

7. How does the essay highlight the relationship between parenting and socioeconomic conditions?

Answer: The essay shifts the responsibility from individual parents to society. Gore shows that:

·       Many parents work long hours due to financial pressure.

·       High rent and low wages reduce time for children.

·       Communal childcare systems that once supported families have declined.

Because of these conditions, parents may rely on television. So, the essay suggests parenting decisions cannot be judged equally for everyone; economic realities directly shape childhood experiences. The essay becomes a critique of inequality, modern isolation, and lack of institutional support for parents.

8. What is the central message of Ariel Gore’s essay?

Answer: The central message is that:

Ø Ideal parenting is human interaction, but society does not provide ideal conditions for all.

Ø TV can serve as a practical parenting aid when used selectively and responsibly.

Ø We should not shame parents for using TV, but instead improve jobs, childcare support, and community care systems.

Ø The debate should focus on what children watch and why, not simply on banning TV.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9. What are the major arguments for and against children watching TV based on the essay?

Answer:

For TV

Against TV

Helps parents manage life when exhausted or working

Can’t provide real emotional care

Educational shows can teach language, values, and learning

Violence and shallow content harm children

Keeps children away from danger when no caregiver is present

Overuse may affect cognitive growth

Can act as a temporary "co-parent."

May reduce real social interaction

The essay concludes that TV is not the enemy; irresponsible content and the absence of support systems are the real issues.

 

10. How can TV be used responsibly for children? Suggest any 4 ways.

Answer: TV can be used responsibly by:

Ø Selecting age-appropriate educational content

Ø Setting fixed time limits for watching

Ø Watching together and discussing the lessons/messages

Ø Avoiding violent or meaningless programmes

Ø Balancing TV with outdoor play, reading, conversation, and family activities

 

11. Write a short paragraph explaining the essay's relevance in the context of Nepal.

Answer: In Nepal, over time, the child-rearing culture has changed. In the past, children were raised in joint families where parents and grandparents used to have time to look after the children. But in the later days, many parents work long hours or migrate abroad for employment, leaving children with limited supervision. In urban and semi-urban areas, rising costs and nuclear family structures reduce family support. Hence, the idea that TV can act as a supportive guardian is relevant here, too. However, unlike some Western settings, many Nepali communities still share childcare informally, so TV should be a support, not a replacement. This lesson encourages parents and students to view media use through a lens of social reality, empathy, and responsible selection, rather than strict judgment.

 

 

"The Wretched Stone", Flax Golden Tales, Summary and analysis.

 The Wretched Stone

-Chris Van Allsburg, USA (1949-)

Characters:

ü Randall Ethan Hope (Captain of the Ship)

ü Mr. Howard (the first mate)

ü Other characters are Musicians, Storytellers, Dancers, Sailors, Avid (greedy) Readers, etc.  

ü This story is a logbook. The journey started on May 8 and ended on July 12 (2 months and 4 Days).

ü The voyage started on 8th May.

ü On 6th June, they reached an island which was not mentioned on the map. Everything was strange, and the plants were without fruit, and there was an unpleasant odor.

ü They found a two-foot-long, gray stone with a glowing surface. The crew took the stone to the ship.

ü They forgot reading, singing, dancing, storytelling, and playing music. They gathered around the stone.

ü On 15th June, a great storm approached the ship and nearly sank her. (The crew didn't help the captain because they were spellbound by television. Unfortunately, one night all the crew turned into apes.)

ü When the captain played violin and read books to them, it had a positive effect on them. Then the crew returned to the previous normal condition. (They requested the captain to set fire to the ship and sink her. When the captain promised to do it, they became happy.)

ü Finally, they were rescued by another ship.

 

Summary of the Story:

The Wretched Stone begins with a notice reading: "Excerpts from the log of the Rita Ann. Randall Ethan Hope, Captain." The captain writes about loading supplies onto the ship at the start of the voyage, and the fine crew that has been assembled by the first mate, Mr. Howard. He notes that many of the men are avid readers, musicians, and storytellers, and as the voyage is underway, they are able to entertain themselves wonderfully.

The story begins as the ship Rita Anne sets sail. Where she is going is never made clear. The work is narrated entirely through the ship’s log entries by Captain Randall Ethan Hope. The crew soon discovers an uncharted (not mapped) island and decides to explore. The captain records the sighting of an uncharted island and decides to disembark (set down) with his crew to look for fruit and fresh water. Then he records their sojourn (temporary stay/visit) in the island's interior. He describes lush vegetation that bears no fruit, bitter water, and an overpowering sickly-sweet smell. He also describes an object the crew found and brought aboard: a gray rock with one smooth and glowing surface. As the crew sets sail again, the captain describes their fascination with the stone. All they seem to do is sit and stare into it. Soon, the captain notes that something is wrong with the crew; they do not speak or play their instruments anymore. He believes they may have contracted some sort of fever from the stone, and he plans to throw it overboard. The next day, he wakes to find that the crew members have locked themselves into the hold with the stone. A storm approaches, and the captain is fearful. How will he sail the ship alone? He pounds on the door of the hold until finally it swings open. He is horrified to find that each member of his crew has turned into an ape.

The next entry records that the storm has passed, though both masts (flag poles) and the ship's rudder are lost. The mysterious stone has gone dark. The men are still apes. As the boat drifts and waits for rescue, the captain discovers that playing the violin and reading to the crew have a positive effect. Discovering that the stone has begun to glow again, he covers it up. He soon reports that the men have returned to normal; those among them who knew how to read return most quickly to their natural forms.

The final entries record that the captain and crew have been rescued. The captain decides to burn the boat and sink it, and the stone to the bottom of the sea, and not to talk about the strange events with anyone. The crew, he reports, is back to normal, except for one thing: an unnatural appetite for the fruit that was available there.

"SURELY YOU'RE JOKING, MR. FEYNMAN", Flax Golden Tales,

 SURELY YOU'RE JOKING, MR. FEYNMAN

-Feynman & Leighton

Background of the author:

Richard Feynman was born in 1918 and passed away in 1988. He was a renowned American physicist celebrated for his groundbreaking contributions to quantum mechanics, particularly the path integral formulation and quantum electrodynamics, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1965. His innovative use of Feynman diagrams provided intuitive visual representations for complex subatomic interactions. Beyond his theoretical work, Feynman was instrumental in the development of the atomic bomb and played a key role in investigating the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. He was one of the greatest theoretical physicists of the 20th century.

Main Points of the Essay:

ü  When Mr. Feynman committed a social error during a tea party organized by the Dean of his college, then after he learned to behave correctly in a social gathering.

ü  In the beginning, he used to sit only with groups of  physics but when he started sitting with a group of other disciplines like zoology, and  biology, then, he became the top student in the college.

ü  This essay tries to say that lot of fun, different kinds of interests in different disciplines and interdisciplinary approaches are the key to successful learning. This essay recounts Feynman's life through his childhood education. He appears as confident, interesting and inspiring. He discovers that he is a great artist, musician,  scientist and critic, too. 

ü  The essay talks about the importance of a sociocultural environment that directly influences learning.

ü  People who are talented and genuine can adjust to any corner of the world by exploring and using their knowledge.

ü  The essay suggests that if we work hard and understand the value of time, we will achieve the destination of our life.

 

Summary:

"Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman" is Richard Feynman's autobiography. It is based on the writer's experience with his college education regarding knowledge and methods. The title of the essay itself captures the point Feynman is trying to make about life and education. The writer claims that knowledge must be based on scientific methods and that it must be gained through an interdisciplinary approach. This essay tries to show that the traditional method of learning is baseless and misleading. Furthermore, a talented and genuine man can adjust anywhere in the world. Interest is the most important motivation in education what and how one learns can be measured.

Richard P. Feynman was a Physics student who completed his undergraduate from MIT, America. He loved his institution too much so that he wanted to graduate from there. However, Prof. Slater did not accept his enrolment because Feynman had to find out what and how the rest of the world was going and doing. So, according to the suggestion of Prof Slater, he decided to go to Princeton College for graduation.

He went to Princeton College with his father by car. He also got a room there. He stayed in the hostel with his friends. The college looked like an imitation of Oxford and Cambridge University. One day, the Dean of Princeton College, Prof. Eisenhart, organised a Tea Party to welcome the new students. Feynman was not very familiar with the culture and manners of such social gatherings. He got confused about how to behave and where to sit. Mr. Feynman was asked if he liked cream or lemon tea. But he replied that he would like both. Listening to his reply, all the people started laughing. At the same time, Mrs Eisenhart commented, “Surely, you are joking, Mr. Feynman!” 

Gradually, Feynman learned the manners of social gatherings at Princeton College. Then, he started going to the tea party and dinner parties as well. In the very beginning, he used to sit in the physics students’ group, but later he started sitting with groups of biologists, zoologists, and philosophers. Mr. Feynman became a talented and genuine student among the college students. He understood the importance of an interdisciplinary approach in learning. So, he realized why Princeton College was right for him.

He started to take part in philosophical discussions and sometimes in biological groups as well as physics classes. He spent lots of time in biological work. He also did research on a phase and discovered the double mutation process. His discovery made him popular among biology students. Later he was invited to Harvard University to give a lecture for biology. Despite his hard work and discovery of new thing in biology, he could not be satisfied. Though he knew and did a lot about biology and other subjects, his actual interest was in physics. So, he expected he would go back to physics sooner.

Mr. Feynman got many opportunities to gain knowledge in different disciplines during his graduation from Princeton College. He got a golden opportunity to observe a cyclotron (An accelerator that imparts energies of several million electron volts to rapidly moving particles) and how it works. He was also invited to conduct a seminar on Biology by Prof. Watson at Harvard University.  So, he gave a lecture to the Biology students at Harvard University. Although Mr Feynman was a physics student, he learned a lot of things and gained experience in Biology. He loves physics more, but equally, he prefers to gain knowledge from different disciplines.

 

The Etiquette of Freedom by Gary Snyder, BBS II, Visions

 Summary and analysis of the essay, "The Etiquette of Freedom" by Gary Snyder.
To find the summary, click here:

THE ETIQUETTE OF FREEDOM

"Girl" BBS II, Vision: Summarya and analysis.

 "Girl" by Jamaica Kincaid (1949) BBS II Year, Business Communication:  Summary and Analysis:




Girl

                    -Jamaica Kincaid (1949)

"Girl" is a monologue of a mother to her daughter by Jamaica Kincaid. In the story, we see the author talking about the things that a young girl should do and learn so that she can be accepted by society. She starts by saying in the beginning that washing clothes is only a task for women, starting on Monday: “Wash the white clothes on Monday”. Then goes on to talk about doing more responsibilities on Tuesday that should only be done by a woman. 

The story is about a mother talking and teaching her young daughter. In this story, Kincaid is trying to show how differently young boys are treated by the same-aged girls and how they are looked at differently for doing the same activities.

The girl’s mother gives her too many commands, ranging from “Wash the white clothes on Monday,” to “Don’t eat fruits on the street.” She should spend time with her mother and respond to her needs.

The mother doesn’t encourage her daughter to share her ideas and feelings. Additionally, the mother doesn’t set her daughter up for success in school and for her future career. She teaches her how to be the perfect woman in society, ranging from “This is how you iron your father’s khaki shirt,” to “This is how you set a table for dinner.

To conclude, this story tries to express the difficulty of mother-daughter relationships, the contradictions of femininity, life under patriarchy, adolescent sexuality, and the legacy of colonialism. In this text, the mother tries to pass down certain beliefs from her culture to her daughter by demanding. For example, she says, “On Sundays, try to walk like a lady,” “This is how you sweep a whole house,” “This is how to behave in the presence of men who don’t know you very well”.

Mother completes her instruction to the girl by showing her “how to make ends meet,” and also by advising her to “always squeeze bread to make sure it’s fresh.” This latter advice prompts the girl to ask what she should do if the baker “won’t let feel the bread.” Mother, disappointed, asks if, “after all,” the girl will become “the kind of woman who the baker won’t let near the bread.” 

"Farewell" by F. G. Lorca: BBS II, Vision

Summary and analysis of the poem "Farewell" by Federico Garcia Lorca (1898- 1936) summary and analysis.


Farewell

F. G. Lorca

Summary and Analysis:

Federico Garcia Lorca's poem "Farewell," translated from the Spanish by Federico Garcia Lorca is a romantic lyric which expresses a desire for the senses to feast on even after death.

The poet or the person (the speaker of the poem) asked someone, perhaps one of his family members, to leave the balcony open if he dies, because from his balcony he wants to see the little boy eating oranges and hear the reaper harvesting the wheat.

There are some people who say that this life on Earth and the physical world here is a world of illusion, meaningless, and our senses are not real; only life after death is real. They give preference to the spirit or the soul. And want to forget the physical world. There are others who give preference to the physical world and condemn the existence of the spiritual world. Unlike them, the poem seems to suggest that this world and the life here is real and we must enjoy it. Our senses are real what we do, hear, or feel have importance. Life is not illusion. We have to make meaningful by enjoying different activities here in the Earth. The poet is not fed up with the worldly activities. So much so that he even after death wants to return back and enjoy the little boy eating oranges and the reaper harvesting the wheat. Eating oranges is symbolic of enjoying earthly activities with pleasure, so is harvesting the wheat.

The poet wants to keep the balance attitude towards the physical and the spiritual world. He seems to believe in both. The world 'balcony' hare is this poem stands for a vintage point from where both inside and outside can be seen. Here inside refers to the soul and outside refers to the physical world. This world 'balcony' has been repeated four times in the poem. This repetition has great significance. He seems, thus, to suggest that souls are real, so are bodies. Acting the present, enjoy it and make it meaningful.

The little 'Farewell' suggests ironical situation or irony of life. The poet does not like to leave the Earth and bid farewell but he has to by force. He is not ready to die because he wants to enjoy the sensory activities here but he is compelled to say farewell. This shows the disparity between human wish or desire and the actuality.

 

Advertisement