TWENTY MINUTES WITH MRS.

OAKENTUBB
(Frank Arthur)

SUMMARY
Mrs. Oakentubb arrives by train at a country railway station. It was a stormy night. So that she
could warm herself. From here, she was going to catch a train, which was due to arrive in twenty
minutes, to take her to Stainthorpe, her hometown.

As she takes off her gloves and spreads her hands to the fire, a man comes in. He too was going
to Stainthorpe, by the same train as Mrs. Oakentubb.

The two, start a conversation, as the porter leaves. The Man tells Mrs. Oakentubb that he is going
to Stainthorpe to meet a lady by the name of Mrs. Oakentubb. He says, I saw a photograph of
her in a newspaper, but couldn’t tell how she looked like. He says I am going to meet her, on a
very important matter. During the discussion, the Man accuses her of murdering his wife and
daughter in a car accident. Mrs. Oakentubb defends herself by saying, that it was an accident.
The police called it manslaughter. Mrs. Oakentubb had gone to a cocktail party and was driving
very fast to win a bet of £5/=. Mrs. Oakentubb killed Man’s wife and daughter. The police
sentenced her to eighteen months’ imprisonment, which she had served.

But the Man is not satisfied with the punishment given to her. He wanted to punish her and take
revenge, for ruining his family life, besides killing his wife and daughter. So, the Man pulls out his
revolver to kill her. But Mrs. Oakentubb fools the Man by convincing him that he would be doing
her a favor, by killing her, whereas, if she were alive, she would continue to suffer mentally, as
she would continue to see the crushed dead bodies of his wife and daughter. This horrible scene,
the picture of the accident will haunt her forever, which is unbearable for her. She holds her hand
and makes an appeal he pushes her down and she falls to the ground and starts weeping.

The Man believes her and leaves the waiting room. As soon as he is gone, she jumps to her feet
in joy and “puts her fingers on the nose, at him.”

Suddenly the door opens and the Man comes in to take his luggage what he sees, makes him very angry
He pulls out his revolver and shoots. She falls dead Thus, the Man takes his revenge. . . . . .
 Questions Answers

Q1. Explain the importance of the label on Mrs. Oakentubb’s suitcase. Why does she
hide it?
Ans. In the melodrama ‘Twenty Minutes with Mrs. Oakentubb’, the male character, whose name
remains unknown throughout, enters the railway waiting room and glances at the tie-on label
attached to the suitcase of a lady who was already sitting there. She is Mrs. Judy Oakentubb, the
very lady he is going to see in Stainthorpe. Mrs. Oakentubb killed this man’s wife and daughter in
a car accident and he wants to avenge their “murder”. If the man had not seen the label, he would
have remained oblivion of her identity and the murder would not have taken place. The
development of the plot would have taken different lines. Realizing the malicious intention of the
man, she deems it appropriate to hide the label so that the man might not know who she is. In
addition, if she had escaped, she might have taken protective measures and her murder might never
have taken place.

Q2. What motive has the man for murdering her?

Ans. Revenge was the clear motive behind the murder of Mrs. Oakentubb. As the male
character in Frank Arthur’s play ‘Twenty Minutes with Mrs. Oakentubb’, whose name
remains unknown throughout, thinks that eighteen months’ imprisonment was not the sufficient
punishment for crushing life out of his wife and daughter. Mrs. Oakentubb’s lawyer advised her
to tell to the court that she had not seen them before the accident. As a matter of fact, she was
drunk and driving criminally fast for a bet. One of her friends wagered her five pounds that she
could not go from Stainthorpe Cross to the coast in fifteen minutes. That is why the man thinks
that killing for his wife and daughter in the accident was not manslaughter, but “plain deliberate
heartless cruel murder”, and that the punishment for such a murder should be death “in the most
painful way.”

Q3. In this melodrama, the author keeps on building up the tension and then relaxing
it, until the final moment of tension when the murder is done. Briefly describe the chief
moments of tension and what follows after each one?

Ans. The first moment of tension comes when the man describes the death of his wife
and daughter in an accident and speaks of his intention to kill Mrs. Oakentubb who was responsible
for that terrible accident. The second moment of tension is when he takes out the revolver and tells
the lady in the waiting room that he is going to shoot her as she herself is Mrs. Oakentubb. The
last and final moment of tension is when he comes back, opens the door and finds her putting
her fingers to the nose at him, takes out the revolver and shoots her dead.

Q4. Write a brief character sketch of Mrs. Oakentubb?

Ans. Mrs. Oakentubb is the central character in Frank Arthur’s play ‘Twenty Minutes with Mrs.
Oakentubb’. She appears to be in her early middle age as she has mouse-brown hair, well streaked
with grey. She is deceptively respectful. However, her villainous character is soon exposed when
we come to know that her daredevil attitude has claimed two innocent lives. She was drunk when
she was driving criminally fast for a bet. In an attempt to avoid a head-on collision, she swerved
onto the pavement and killed two innocent pedestrians. Unscrupulous as she is, Mrs. Oakentubb
tells a lie in court to reduce her crime to manslaughter, and gets away with only eighteen months
in prison. Another sly and deceitful aspect of her personality is revealed when she keeps up the
pretence of being regretful. As soon as the vengeful man leaves the room thinking that the
unremitting mental anguish is her real punishment, Mrs. Oakentubb rises to her feet and puts her
fingers to her nose at him. The man suddenly re-enters the waiting room, sees her offensive
gesture, and shoots her. Thus, Mrs. Oakentubb in rightly punished for the wrong she did.

Q5: At what point in the play do we become certain that the man knows that the woman
in the waiting room is Mrs. Oakentubb? When, in fact do you think he discovered her
identity?
Ans: When the man takes her coat and throws it on the bench his glance falls on the table of the
suitcase he becomes certain that the lady is the waiting room in Mrs. Oakentubb.
When she tries to hide her identity by hiding the label with a flap it confirms that the man has
discovered her identity.

Q6: When is the audience likely to suspect she might be Mrs. Oakentubb?
Ans: The man talks the lady of his tragic story, happened in the Korea and informs her that her
smile gave him the purpose of life that to kill the lady who killed his wife and daughter. She
becomes nervous and started at him fascinated. She tries to persuade him not to devote her life for
the wicked purpose. And when, after a while she tucks the flap on her identity the audience begin
to suspect that she might be Mrs. Oakentubb.

Q7: Why, in your opinion, does the anther make the porter a humorous character?
Ans: Suspense, humor and romance are the essentials parts of a thrill. In this play the porter gives
relief in the tense and gloomy atmosphere. He relaxes the audience by his humour.

Q8: Suspense is an important element in a thriller. Briefly show how the anther keeps
the audience in suspense for the answer to two questions will he find out who she is?
Will he kill her?
Ans: The author keeps the readers in suspense and delaying the murder. He wants to kill the lady
in a painful way. The author keeps the audience in suspense they are compelled to think weather
he will find out who she is. And when he identifies her he prolongs the murder and it took place
when the play ends.

Q9: Write a brief character sketch of the porter.

Ans: Although Porter is not a major character like Mrs. Oakentubb and the man but he also plays
a significant role in the drama. By his simple, romantic and humorous nature he amuses the
audience. He also relaxes the tense situation. He addresses the lady as love and chuckles at her. He
looks after the passengers and serves them.

Q10: Briefly discuss whether the play would have had a more satisfying ending if the
man had not come back through the door, seen Mrs Oakentubb vulgar and impenitent
(rude) gestures and shot her that is to say if it had ended in Mrs Oakentubb collapsing
with genuine remorse (regret) and the man’s decision that he would be adequately
revenged if she went on living.

Ans: I think the play would not have had a more satisfying ending if the lady was to be saved. It
was inevitable to kill her because of her vulgarity and impertinent gestures. If the murderer goes
set free the aim of justice is violated. Justice demands that punishment should be proportionate to
crime.
REFLECTION ON THE RE-AWAKENING EAST
(Bertrand Russell)

SUMMARY
The re-awakening of the east was a huge movement, some two thousand years ago. Power
changed hands from the East to the West, throughout this period. In the earliest history, the East
dominated the world. Its supremacy was not only military but science, philosophy, poetry and
the arts all flourished in China and the Muslim world whereas Europe was sunk in The Dark Ages.

The writer feels as the east is re-awakening, a time may come, when it may take a lead in world
politics. In the author’s view, Russian communism is a great threat to Asia. Communism is the
most dangerous form of imperialism.

In order to face this danger, the writer thinks that Asia should be industrialized. In, his opinion,
industrialization is & source of power and therefore it is necessary for progress. Science and
machinery are necessary too for development and progress. But the writer advises Asia to use
science for peaceful purposes and not to make weapons of war.
Another thing that can save Asia from communism is, its own traditional culture So, Asia should
take pains to preserve their own culture, while the good features of the western civilization, may
also be adopted.

According to Russell, there are three clear civilizations in Asia- that of Islam, that of India and that
of China. Each is very rich in its culture. They should maintain their culture. There should be no
attempt at cultural uniformity. Science and machinery are necessary for progress, but not at the
cost of traditional culture as was done in Europe.

If life is to be happy, it should not become mechanized. It should have music, poetry, art and love
and the simple joys of life. These things are forgotten by communism, as well as those, who think
themselves to be in the forefront of progress.

The writer feels that Asia will be able to preserve its independence because the world is divided
into two hostile camps. But Asia should not copy the mistakes of the west.
The west achieved its present position of progress because of sciences. But all this development,
which should have added to human happiness has been defeated because of one fatal fault—
“the love of power over other human beings” The writer’s advice to Asia is, that, it should not
use power for conquering weaker nations It should learn to have mutual self-respect.

The writer hopes, perhaps some Asia countries will have learned this lesson. On the other hand,
some will have only learned to copy the cruel western rulers, who are bringing the west to
disaster (because of the two world wars).
Q.1 Why is it insular for European historians to term the centuries after the fall of the
Roman Empire“The Dark Ages”?
Ans. Although the term “The Dark Ages” is generally applied to the early medieval period of
Western European history, specifically, it refers to the time (476-800) when there was no Holy
Roman Emperor, or the time (500-1500) when there were frequent warfare and a virtual
disappearance of urban life. In either case, it was only the Christened Europe which was going
through a period of intellectual darkness and barbarity. The Muslim world, as well as Spain, and
the Chinese Empire were both culturally brilliant and geographically extensive. Thus, Bertrand
Russell in the chapter ‘Reflections of the Re-awakening East’ says that it is the narrow outlook of
the Europeans to term this period “The Dark Ages”.

Q.2 On what grounds does the author argue that Communism is the “most modern and
virulent form of Western Imperialism”?
Ans. In the chapter ‘Reflections on the Re-awakening East’ Bertrand Russell argues that
Communism is the most modern and bitterly hostile form of Western policy to establish their
political and economic hegemony over other nations. He says that although Communism is
not widely recognized in either the East or the West, it is wiping out the ancient and glorious
traditions of civilization in Asia. He also says that China has been greatly affected by it and advises
the other Asian countries that re-awakening of East should not mean subjection to Communism as
its philosophy is German and its regime is imposed by military force. In addition, he says
that poetry and music and art and love and the simple joys of life are necessary to make human
life tolerable, but these elements are forgotten in the Communist philosophy. That is why Bertrand
Russell considers Communism the most modern and virulent form of Western Imperialism.

Q.3 Why does the author consider it useless to resist industrialization?

Ans. In the chapter ‘Reflections on the Re-awakening East’ Bertrand Russell
considers industrialization an essential condition of survival in the modern times. It was a source
of power for England in the 19thcentury, and it is a source of power for America and Russian in
the present day. Industrialism prevails wherever there is sufficient civilization to make it possible.
Therefore, it is useless to resist industrialism. Bertrand Russell quotes two examples of
such ineffective protests. Firstly, he mentions Carlyle’s book Past and Present, which eloquently
expresses such angry protests on account of the ruthlessness of industrialization and destruction of
beauty. The second example, Russell gives, is that of Gandhi whose immense influence on his
countrymen remained equally ineffective to restore the spinning-wheel.

Q.4 Does the author welcome cultural uniformity or not? How does he justify his
attitude?
Ans. Bertrand Russell does not welcome cultural uniformity. In the chapter ‘Reflections on the
Re-awakening East’, he strongly advocates both political and cultural independence. He says that
Asia contains at least three distinct civilizations: that of Islam, that of India and that of China.
Therefore, it is a trifle absurd to expect cultural or political unity. History shows that no
great civilization –such as Indus Valley, Babylonian, Macedonian, Roman, Chinese, and Islamic
– has ever been cosmopolitan. Thus, the distinctive identity, and not cultural uniformity, leads
civilizations to great heights.
Q.5 How is traditional culture threatened in an age dominated by science and
machinery?
Ans. Traditional culture indicates all human activities which have been preserved, learned and
transmitted over a long period of time. Bertrand Russell says that traditional culture is threatened
by science and machinery. In ‘Reflections on the Re-awakening East’, he says that science and
machinery have been superimposed on the older cultures, sweeping away not only what was bad,
but also what was good in the culture of the past. To counter this constant threat, Bertrand Russell
suggests that science and machinery should be rightly controlled because they are good and
absolutely essential in modern times. He also suggests that we must continue appreciating poetry,
music, art, love and simple joys of life to make to make human life tolerable.

Q.6 What, in the author’s view, has been the most serious flaw in the character of the
West over the last few centuries?
Ans. The most serious flaw in the character of the West has been the love of power over other
human beings. In ‘Reflections on the Re-awakening East’, Bertrand Russell says that the West
displayed extraordinary energy from the 16th century onward, which took both good and
bad forms: the abundance of necessaries and comforts on the one hand; racial and political
oppression and exploitation of Asians and Africans on the other hand. The West used this energy
and ingenuity to further imperialistic aims rather than attend to the needs and wants of humanity
at large.

Q.7 What, in the author’s opinion, should Asian countries accept from the West and
what should they reject?
Ans. In Reflections on the Re-awakening East’, Bertrand Russell advises the Asian countries to
accept industrialism from the West because it is a necessary condition of survival in modern times.
Industrialism is a source of power and Asian countries will it difficult to preserve their
independence without it. Bertrand Russell also warns Asian countries of the devastating
consequences of copying the mistake of the West. Ruthless despots have brought the West
to disaster. Their deep desire to have control other nations crushed human happiness at large. Thus,
Asian countries should accept all means of prosperity and reject all ways of destruction.

Q8: To what cause does the author attribute the power of England in the early nineteenth
century and the power of the United States and Russia today?
Ans: The author attributes the power of England In the early nineteenth century due to the
discoveries of Vasco de Gama and Columbus, its scientific techniques and the growth of
industrialism. He also attributes the power of the United States and Russia today on the base of the
virtual monopoly of machines production, which is the source of power in the modern age.

Q9: What reason does the author give for his opinion that the nation of Asia will not
find it hard to keep their independence?
Ans: According to the author Asia will not find it hard to keep their independence because they
had been tortured and exploited in the regime of the west so they will not allow the western to rule
on them again. He also explains that due to the impartial spectators they will not interfere the two
blocks and in this way, their independence will not be threatened by Europe.
Q10: What parallels may be drawn between the decline of the power of Europe at the
end of the Roman Empire and the decline in the power of Europe since 1914?
Ans: After the fall of Roman Empire especially Christian Europe was sunk in the abyss of
barbarism. It was thus enfeebled and the culture, leadership, and power transferred to the east.
After the First World War 1914, the Asian nations regained their power and they were not only
stronger but they also had brilliant culture and they made progress in science when European
freedom was threatened by the alliance of the Asian countries.
 THE DAY THE DAM BROKE
(James Thurber)

SUMMARY

The Columbus—Ohio, broken dam rumor began, about noon of 12th March 1913, on High street.
The author is not sure, as to how the rumor began. Perhaps, it began thus. Suddenly, somebody
began to run. Maybe he was late for an appointment, to meet his wife for which he was very late.
Whatever it was, he ran towards the east. Somebody else began to run, perhaps a newsboy in
high spirits. He was followed b a portly (fat) gentleman of affairs, who walked at a trot. Inside of
ten minutes, everybody High Street was running.

The fear of the broken dam was put into words. by a little old lady in an electric (an electric
carriage), or a traffic cop, policeman) or by a small boy. Nobody knows who. All of a sudden, two
thousand people were running towards the east and shouting, ‘Go east’.

The writer’s mother and grandfather also joined the crowd. The writer’s mother did not panic.
She turned out all the fires and she took with her a dozen eggs and two loaves of bread, as she
planned to take shelter in the Memorial Hall, two blocks away.

The writer’s grandfather was under a great misconception when he saw the crowd running. He
thought that the city was under an attack by the Nathan Bedford Forrest’s Cavalry. So, he, with
his sword in his hand, shouted at the enemy, Let the sons come’. So grandfather had to he
stunned (unconscious) with the ironing board; The writer had to carry grandfather on his back,
who was over six feet and weighed about a hundred and seventy pounds. Because of this, the
writer’s family lagged behind. Grandfather regained consciousness at Parson’s Avenue and again
he challenged the rebel dogs. But at last, when he realized that the darn had broken, he too
joined the crowd.

Another episode to a bent Colonel, who at the time was drowsing in a chair – there was a parade
at Fort Hayes. When the crowd was going past the fort, the crowd shouted, go east.’ The Lieut
Colonel thought that he was ordered to go east, So. he, in turn, ordered his men to go east and
he along with three hundred soldiers were running towards the east. A fat man stopped the
officer and asked why he was running. He didn’t know why he was running, so he asked a little
child, who informed that the dam had broken, go east. Thus roared the colonel, ‘go east’. He
carried the exhausted child and was leading the crowd, with the soldiers following him.

The writer mentions a visitor, in an airplane. While flying over the city, he looked down on the
road but was horrified to see a crowd running on the street. It was ‘very hard for him to know
the reason why the people were running on the street. He was reminded of an incident of the
Marie Celeste (a Ship), which was found in perfect order after being abandoned by its crew, who
disappeared forever.

At the time of the dam scare, the writer’s aunt, Edith Taylor, was in a moving theatre. She could
hear shouts and the sound of running feet. An old man said something and went towards the
door, at a trot. This startled everybody. In no time the crowd, inside the theatre was rushing
towards the exit. A woman shouted, “Fire”, who always expected to be burned up in a theatre.
So, everyone inside the theatre got frightened and rushed out of the theatre.

Outside of people in panic were running towards the east. A woman, who was very tired,
somehow managed to climb, a bronze statue of Sherman, Stanton, Grant, and Sheridan who was
watching silently the going to pieces of the city.

A woman, in her late fifties, went past the writer’s aunt, so the writer’s aunt with some effort,
came alongside her and asked, “What is it?” She looked at her and stepping up her speed replied,
“Don’t ask me, ask God.”

When the writer’s aunt reached Grant Avenue, Dr. Mallory passed her and shouted, ‘It’s got us.”
He mistook the swishing sound of the skates for the rushing Water. So, while running to save his
life, he fell on his face. He kept lying and did not bother to get up, as he was sure that the flood
water would sweep him away. Soon the boy on the skates rushed passed him and only then he
realized, what he had been running from. He looked back, but there was no sign of any water.
But after resting awhile, he started running again and caught up with the author’s aunt at Ohio
Avenue, where both of them rested together. Hundreds of people passed them. Nobody went in
his car, because all ears had to be cranked, and no one took the risk to start his car.

The next day everyone went to his work as usual. Everyone was so ashamed that no one had the
courage to talk, about the events of the previous day. Only after two years had passed that the
people dared to talk about the breaking of the dam, jokingly. But people like Dr. Mallory, even
after twenty years, would shut their mouths tightly, because they were terribly ashamed of their
conduct on the 12th of March, 1913.

Q.1 How does the panic appear to have started in Ohio?

Ans. James Thurber relates the broken-dam rumor in his essay ‘The Day the Dam Broke’. He
does not mention an explicit cause, rather a probable one, as to how the rumor started in Columbus,
Ohio. Business activities were in full swing on High Street, which was the main channel of trade.
Some people were making proud, some little boasts. Suddenly somebody began to run and, in just
ten minutes, two thousand people were abruptly running like hell, shouting “Go east! Go east!
Go east!” The fear of the broken dam might have been put into words by an old lady in an electric,
or by a traffic cop, or by a small boy, but Thurber says that no one knew who spread the rumor.
Q.2 How did Thurber’s mother cope with the situation?

Ans. In his essay ‘The Day the Dam Broke’ James Thurber tells that unlike the other people,
who ran out leaving fires burning and food cooking and doors wide open, his mother turned out
all the fires. She planned to take refuge somewhere in the top of Memorial Hall, so she took
with her a dozen eggs and two loaves of bread as a precaution against hunger during the refuge.
However, she could not reach Memorial Hall as the flood of people, who were shouting “God
east”, drew her along and the rest of her family members with her.

Q.3 How long did the panic last and how was order restored?
Ans. The broken-dam rumor, as James Thurber mentions in his essay ‘The Day the Dam
Broke’, did not last more than two hours. The tangled evacuation of the city ended as abruptly as
it began, and all the people silently went to their home, leaving the streets peaceful and deserted.
The order was restored by the militiamen. However, their bellowing through the megaphone
initially added to the confusion and increased the panic because people thought they were saying
“The dam has now broken” rather than “The dam has not broken.”

Q.4 Why did Dr. Mallory think that flood waters were about to engulf (drown) him?
Ans. Dr. Mallory passed the writer’s aunt and in his panic said, “It got us!” He was sure that the
flood waters were going to sweep him away. He actually mistook the swishing sound of the skates
for the rushing water. So, while running to save his life, he fell. He kept lying flat on his face, as
he was sure that the flood waters would engulf him. Soon, the boy on the skates rushed past him
and only then he realized, what he had been running from.

Q.5 Why did the citizens of Columbus not care to talk about the events of the March
1913?
Ans. The citizens of Columbus were so ashamed of their conduct the previous day, that nobody
had the courage to talk about the event of 12th March 1913. It was only after two years or more
than the people plucked courage, to talk about the broken darn rumor, jokingly. But there are a
few people like Dr. Mallory; who, even after twenty years, would shut their mouths, tightly,
because they were terribly ashamed of their conduct on the 12th March 1913.

Q.6 Thurber’s sardonic but affectionate view in “The Day the Dam Broke”.

Ans. The author, James Thurber is one of the leading. American humorists of the modern times.
The Day the Dam Broke is an extremely amusing and a humorous essay.
The author pokes fun at the panic-stricken people of Ohio, who thought that their lives were in
danger because the dam had given way.
The writer laughs at the mob psychology, and how it works in a given situation. A person in a mob
does not think or rationalize. He merely follows the dictates of others.
The author also suggests that man by nature is very timid. He wants to save his life under all
circumstances particularly if he is faced with danger.
So, while the author criticizes the crowd for not using their brains and behaving stupidly, yet he
sympathizes with them, for the suffering they underwent. This is his affectionate view of the
crowd.

Q.7 How does the panic start and how did it end, in “The Day The Dam Broke”?

Ans. The author, James Thurber, is not sure, as to how the panic began in The Day the Dam Broke.
He feels perhaps it began some such manner. At about moon of 12th March 1913, on High Street,
suddenly somebody began to run. Maybe, he was late for an appointment to meet his wife.
Whatever it was, he ran east. He was followed by a fat gentleman of affairs, he walked at a trot.
Within ten minutes, everybody on High Street was running in panic. While running, they were
shouting, “the dam has broken”, “go east, to safety”. This is how the panic started.
The panic ended as abruptly, as it began. It lasted for two hours when finally order was restored by
militiamen, announcing over megaphones that, “the dam has not broken”, but the people in their
confusion heard that, “the dam has now broken”. Thus, the people with renewed strength started to
run. At last, the mob was brought under control.
 PAKISTAN AND THE MODERN WORLD
(Liaquat Ali Khan)

SUMMARY
This essay is a speech delivered by Liaquat Au Khan, during his visit to America in 1950, in his
capacity, as the Prime Minister of Pakistan. He was thanking the teachers and the students of the
University of Kansas City, for conferring on him, an honorary degree of law.

In his speech, Liaquat Ali Khan told the Americans, the reasons for the demand and creation of
Pakistan. Before the creation of Pakistan, India was ruled by the British. The sub-continent
consisted of one hundred million Muslims and there hundred million Hindus. Long experience
and history had taught the Muslims that, under a dominating majority of three to one, freedom
from the British rule would mean for the Muslims, not freedom, but simply a change of masters.

Religion was not the only difference that made the Muslims a separate nation. There were other
very serious differences which separated the Muslims from the Hindus. The Hindus believe in a
caste system, while the Muslims believe in the equality of all men. The Muslims believe in the
right of private ownership for everyone, whether man or woman. The Muslims have laws of
inheritance and economic institutions while the Hindu laws are designed, to promote the
accumulation of wealth. Most importantly, the Muslims feared that under the Hindu domination,
their culture would be completely wiped out. It was for these reasons that the Muslims
demanded a country of their own.

The demand, as we can see now, was a very just one. There were vast areas in the subcontinent,
where the Muslims were numerous enough to form a nation of their own — a nation much bigger
than most nations in the world.

Therefore a separate homeland for the Muslims meant freedom and self-government. The
demand for Pakistan also promised for the Hindus, freedom from the constant discontent of a
large and unmanageable minority. It was under these circumstances that came into being. If it
were not so, the differences between the Hindus and the Muslims would have led to
unimaginable troubles and problems.

Our prime minister desired that the west should share its great fund of knowledge (science and
technology), skill and experience with countries like Pakistan otherwise the Asian people would
remain backward. The other duty of the west should be to show that democracy is international
in nature. The west should also not avoid its responsibility, to maintain peace in the world and
condemn aggression everywhere and take steps to prevent them. If the west fulfills these
obligations, only then, the people of Asia, would be able to progress and prosper.
Q1. Briefly state the main reason given by Liaquat Ali Khan for the Muslim’s desire
not to continue living in a united India.
Ans. The main reason given by Liaquat Ali Khan in his speech ‘Pakistan and the Modern World’
was the disproportionate number of the Muslims and the Hindus. In pre-partition India, there lived
a hundred million Muslims and three hundred others—mostly Hindus. Therefore, freedom from
the British would be virtually meaningless to Muslims because the higher number of Hindus would
make the Muslims a perpetual (= permanent) political minority. Thus it would not be free but
merely a change of masters.

Q2. What main differences does Liaquat Ali Khan point out between Muslim and
Hindu beliefs and attitudes?
Ans. In his speech ‘Pakistan and the Modern World’, Liaquat Ali Khan points out three main
differences between Muslim and Hindu beliefs and attitudes: religious, social, and economic.
Discussing the religious differences, he says that Muslims were monotheists whereas Hindus were
polytheists. Muslims believed not only in the Prophet of Arabia but also in Christ and the prophets
of the Old Testament whereas Hindus did not. Discussing the social differences, he says that
Hindus had a caste system whereas Muslims upheld gender and racial equality. Even priesthood
is regarded as a negation of the bond between the Creator and each of His creatures. Similarly, the
economic outlooks of Muslims and Hindus were greatly different. Unlike Hindus, Muslims
believed in the right of private ownership, the law of inheritance, and distribution of wealth.

Q3. On what ground does Liaquat Ali Khan assert that the first duty of the Pakistanis
as a free people is to themselves?
Ans. In his speech ‘Pakistan and the Modern World’, Liaquat Ali Khan quotes Charles Caleb
Colton to explain that free people must maintain their own freedom first. Otherwise, a free nation,
without constant vigilance, would disgrace the fair name of free men and women all over the
world. To get the rightful place in the modern world, the Pakistanis must go forward at a double
pace. They must use all the resources and energy they have to make available the basic necessities
of life, health-care units, and education facilities. In other words, political freedom, without
freedom from want, disease, and ignorance, has no real value for common men and women. Thus
the first duty of the Pakistanis as a free people is to themselves.

Q4. What is the synthesis that Liaquat Ali Khan believes in necessary for Pakistan to
achieve?
Ans. Synthesis means combining different things to form a coherent whole. The synthesis which
Liaquat Ali Khan thinks necessary for Pakistan is the combination of our ancient steadfast faith
with the pioneering virility of modern technology. In other words, we have clear-cut beliefs which
provide us strength in modern uneasy times. However, we lagged behind in the match of
civilization during the centuries of foreign domination. Now Pakistan must develop its mental and
material resources not only for the sake of progress but also for the sake of world peace.

Q5. Liaquat Ali Khan contrasts two emotions that the Asian people tend to feel when
they view they view the Western world. What are these two emotions?
Ans. In his speech ‘Pakistan and the Modern World’, the emotions Liaquat Ali Khan contrasts
are admiration and impatience. He says that the Asian people have now entered upon a new and
dynamic phase of nationalism after centuries of suppression. They are now able to see the great
contrast between their standard of living and the standard of living in the West. One the one hand,
they greatly admire the progress and advancement of civilization in the west. On the other hand,
they are more impatient than ever before with their own misery and backwardness. They also want
to enjoy the fullest advantages of freedom and democracy.

Q6. What advantage does he show the Hindus to have gained from the creation of
Pakistan?
Ans. Liaquat Ali declared that from the freedom of Muslims Hindus also have the opportunities
to practice their faith freely. They can develop their culture and stable their economy by giving
full concentration without any interruption. They can also live easy and peaceful life in Asia.

Q7. ‘Our administrative machinery had to be built up from scratch’ what does this
sentence mean?
Ans. This sentence means that when Pakistan came into being it had no flag, capital, military
equipment, administration, and military. They were asked to build the country of eighty million
people within two months. The share of Pakistan remained largely undelivered and they had to
build up the country from the very beginning.

Q8. What does Liaquat Ali Khan state the real meaning of freedom, for the common man,
to be?
Ans. Liaquat Ali Khan states that for a common man freedom mean freedom from wants, freedom
from desires and freedom from ignorance. If a common man is free from these things he really
feels the taste of freedom.

Q9. What is meaning by ‘syntheses?

Ans. Synthesis means the act of combining separate ideas, belief, and styles.

Q10. What does he put forward as the two main duties today of the Western world?

Ans. The two main duties of the Western world that Liaquat Ali Khan puts forward are that they
should share their fund of knowledge, skills, and experience within developing countries. They
should also play an active role in the maintenance of world peace.
 ACT III OF THE SILVER BOX
(John Galsworthy)

SUMMARY
Act III of the Silver Box, starts from the scene of a court. Two sisters, Maud Livens, and Theresa
Livens were found crying on the street. The father was jobless, while the mother had broken the
home and gone on the streets. The father was not in a position to look after his daughters. So,
he asked the Magistrate, to get his daughters admitted to an orphanage. This was dually done.

After this case, the case of the silver box comes up for hearing. According to the story, Jack
Barthwick, son of John Barthwick, MP, took a lady’s purse, under the effect of alcohol on Easter
Monday night (at midnight). In this drunken condition, he was looking for the keyhole, on the
wrong side of the door; when Mr. Jones (a laborer), who was passing by, helped him to unlock
the door. Jack invited Jones in for a drink, and then told him, “take anything you like,” and then
went to sleep, on the sofa. Jones, after finishing, his drink, took the silver box and went home.

The next morning, the butler informed John Bathwick about the theft of the silver box. Mrs.
Jones, who was a charwoman in the house, was suspected of the theft. Her house was searched
by the police and the silver box was found from, the coat packet of Mr. Jones So, the police
arrested Mr. and Mrs. Jones and presented them before the court of the Magistrate.

During the proceedings of the case, the Magistrate is bribed by John Bathwick. He then, through
his lawyer (Mr. Roper), tells the Magistrate, that considering the poverty (poor) of the prisoners,
he does not press the charge (blame) as to the silver box. Perhaps he may deal with Mr. Jones
for assaulting (beating) the police and creating violence. The Magistrate punishes Mr. Jones for
the theft by sentencing him to one month’s hard labor but releases Mrs. Jones with honor.

Through this play, the author criticises the British Legal System, which was corrupt in the 19 th
century. There was one law for the rich and another for the poor Mr. Jones, a poor man is
punished, although he is completely innocent. While Jack is let off, although he is guilty of stealing
a lady’s purse, simply because he is a rich man’s son.

Q.1 What purpose, in your opinion, is deserved by beginning this act of the play with
the case of the Livens girls, which has nothing to do with the main story?
Ans. John Galsworthy starts ‘Act III of The Silver Box’ with the case of the Livens girls, which
has no direct connection with the case of theft of the silver box. However, this case is highly
significant. The Livens are suffering from unemployment, the disintegration of family and
homelessness. In fact, they represent hundreds of such cases in the police courts. The deplorable
socio-economic conditions of the masses give the reader foretaste of what is going to follow. The
Jones children are likely to suffer the same fate when their father will be imprisoned and their
mother will be unemployed. Thus, the reader gets the feeling that the faulty legal system will not
dispense justice.
Q.2 Why are Mr. Barth wick and his son so anxious that as little as possible should be
said in court about the purse and the little money Jones had in his possession?
Ans. In Act III of The Silver Box, John Galsworthy presents us with two identical cases of theft
in a fit of drunken mischief: Jack Barthwick steals a purse from a woman and James Jones steals
the silver cigarette box and the purse. Jack is the son of Mr. Barthwick who is a highly respectable
Liberal Member of Parliament whereas Jones is the husband of Mr. Barthwick’s charwoman.
Although Mr. Barthwick has brought the case of Jones’s theft to the court, he is anxious that his
son’s crime should not be talked about at all because his reputation is at stake. Any
legal proceedings against his son will surely bring social ruin on him.

Q.3 Briefly discuss whether the Magistrate gives Jones a fair trial?
OR
Was justice done to Jones? Explain.
Ans. It appears that James Jones was not given a fair trial. In Act III of The Silver Box, John
Galsworthy presents us with two identical cases of theft in a fit of drunken mischief: Jack
Barthwick steals a purse from a woman and James Jones steals the silver cigarette box and the
purse. As a matter of fact, both Jones and Jack should have been treated equal treatment, but Jack’s
father who is a Liberal Member of Parliament was able to hush up his son’s crime
whereas poverty-stricken Jones is sentenced to one month in prison with hard labor.

Q3: What function is Mr. Roper discharging in the magistrate’s court?

Ans. Mr. Roper is on the side of Barthwick. He accompanied Barthwick on the court.

Q4: What facts does Marlow’s evidence establish?

Ans. Thomas Marlow who is the butler of Mr. Barthwick informs the court that the silver cigarette
box belonged to Mr. Barthwick. He also tells that it was missing and he had informed his employer
about it. He confirms that Mr. Jones is also the charwoman of Mr. Barthwick. He informs the
court that the silver box was placed on the dining room table on the night of Easter.

Q5: From the constable’s evidence we learn that Mrs. Jones was the first to be charged
with the theft. Why was this so?
Ans. From the constable’s evidence, we learn that Mr. Jones is the first to be punished because she
is the charwoman of Mr. Barthwick. It is thought that without her help the theft is by no mean
possible. She was suspected to have stolen the box so she was the first to be charged with it.

Q6: What led the constable to arrest and charge Jones as well?
Ans. The police started an investigation and discovered the silver box from the house of Jones.
Police arrested Mr. Jones and when she was being taken to police station Mr. Jones interrupted the
police and said that she was innocent and it was he who had stolen the silver box. When the police
did not release her he struck the constable and in this way, he was also arrested with his wife.
Q7: Briefly give the probable reasons for the magistrate’s decision to discharge Mrs.
Jones.
Ans. The magistrate discharged Mrs. Jones because Mr. Barthwick declared that he did not press
the charge as to the silver box. Mr. Jones record was also so clear in the court that there was nothing
against her from the statement of Mr. Jones it was obvious that he allowed Jones to his house and
she had nothing to do in the case. Her husband had also pleaded guilty to stealing the box.

Q9: Assuming that Jones has received a fair trial, why does this act of the play leave us
with a feeling that injustice has been done?
Ans. This act of the play leaves us that injustice has been done because jack one the influential
man’s son goes free although he had committed an identical crime .the part of the evidence that
could go against him was not recorded. In spite of the fact that Mr. Jones had nothing in the case,
she lost her job who as the only mean of the children.

Q10: What do you imagine to be the unspoken plea that Mrs. Jones makes to Mr.
Barthwick at the very end?

Ans. At the end when magistrate announced the decision and Jones were declared to be the guilty.
Everybody rise to go home. Mrs. Jones turns to his bags with the humble gesture. It was the sign
that she wanted to continue her job but Barthwick hesitates and hurries out of the court.
 THE WORLD AS I SEE IT
(Albert Einstein)

SUMMARY
Our situation on this earth seems strange. Every one of us appears here involuntarily and
uninvited for a short stay, without knowing the whys and the wherefore In our daily lives we only
feel that man is here for the sake of others, for those whom we love and for many other beings
whose fate is connected with our own. I am often worried at the thought that my life is based to
such a large extent on the work of my fellow human beings and I am aware of my great
indebtedness to them.

I do not believe in freedom of the will. Schopenhauer’s words: “Man can do what he wants, but
he cannot what he wills” accompany me in all situations throughout my life and reconcile me
with the actions of others even if they are rather painful to me. This awareness of the lack of
freedom of will preserves me from taking too seriously myself and my fellow men as acting and
deciding individuals and from losing my temper.

I never coveted affluence and luxury and even despise them a good deal.
My passion for social justice has often brought me into conflict with people, as did my aversion
to any obligation and dependence I do not regard as absolutely necessary. I always have a high
regard for the individual and have an insuperable distaste for violence and clubmanship.

All these motives made me into a passionate pacifist and anti-militarist. I am against any
nationalism, even in the guise of mere patriotism. Privileges based on position and property have
always seemed to me unjust and pernicious, as did any exaggerated personality cult.
I am an adherent of the ideal of democracy, although I well know the weaknesses of the
democratic form of government. Social equality and economic protection of the individual
appeared to me always as the important communal aims of the state.
Although I am a typical loner in daily life, my consciousness of belonging to the invisible
community of those who strive for truth, beauty, and justice has preserved me from feeling
isolated.

The most beautiful and deepest experience a man can have is the sense of the mysterious. It is
the underlying principle of religion as well as all serious endeavor in art and science. He who
never had this experience seems to me, if not dead, then at least blind. To sense that behind
anything that can be experienced there is a something that our mind cannot grasp and whose
beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble reflection, this is religiousness.

In this sense I am religious. To me, it suffices to wonder at these secrets and to attempt humbly
to grasp with my mind a mere image of the lofty structure of all that there is.
 This article is a speech by Albert Einstein to the German League of Human Rights, Berlin, in the autumn of 1932.

Q1. What leads Einstein to feel a strong sense of duty towards his fellowmen?
Ans. Einstein’s belief that we exist for our fellowmen leads him to feel a strong sense of duty
towards them.
In his essay ‘The World as I See It’ Einstein divides his fellow human beings into two groups: his
immediate family, and humanity at large. He asserts that his inner and outer life depends on their
labor, regardless of the fact whether they are alive or dead. Thus he thinks that he must also exploit
all his potential to contribute to human happiness in return.

Q.2 What is Einstein’s attitude towards property, outward success, and luxury?
Ans. In his essay ‘The World as I See It’ Einstein considers that property, outward success, and
luxury are the ordinary objects of human Endeavour. According to Einstein, these objects are
contemptible because the ideas behind them are nothing but love for ease and self-centered
happiness. He severely criticizes all those people who direct their energies to property, outward
success and luxury, and condemns these people as “a herd of swine”. Alternatively, he approves
of those ideals which helped him unleash his potential, that is, Truth, Good, and Beauty.

Q.3 What is Einstein’s attitude to war? What forces does he blame for the persistence
of war?
Ans. Einstein hates war and holds human race in high esteem. In his essay ‘The World as I See It’
Einstein describes war as mean, contemptible and abominable “business” because there are always
commercial and political interests behind it. He believes that the sound sense of nations is
corrupted by promoting these interests through the schools and the Press. Einstein despises war so
much that he would prefer to be cut into pieces than take part in the war.

Q.4 What does Einstein appear to regard as the most precious element in human
experience?
Ans. In his essay ‘The World as I See It’ Einstein says that the most precious element in human
experience is the mysterious. He believes that true art and true science, as well as religion, are the
expressions of this fundamental emotion. He describes the mysterious as the existence of
something whose manifestations have the most profound reason and the most radiant beauty, but
cannot be penetrated. They are only accessible to our understanding in their most elementary
forms. It is no less than a religion to Einstein to try and comprehend even a tiny portion of the
cosmic design, whether it is the eternity of life or the marvelous structure of reality.

Q5: What are the “insecure foundations” referred to at the end of the last sentence of
the fourth paragraph?
Ans. insecure foundation at the end of the last sentence of the fourth paragraph Einstein means
that we should not be limited and self-centered that we only love to our own country, home, and
the country people. We should love to all human beings and should have social justice and social
responsibilities.

Q6: What in, brief, is Einstein’s attitude to leadership?

Ans. Einstein believes in democracy and teaches to respects every individual. He is of the view
that the people should be free to choose their representative. They should not be bound to follow
the leader who is thrust upon them.

Q7: On what grounds does Einstein put the individual before the state?
Ans. Einstein puts the individuals before the state before the state because it is individuals the
personality that creates the noble and the sublime, while the herd as such remains dull in thought
and feeling.

Q8: What example does he give of service by the state to the individual?
Ans. Einstein praises the state where political systems give the sufficient weight and importance
to the humans, provide them security looking after in need and provide them relief in case of illness
and need.

Q9: What does he appear to regard as the most precious element in human experience?
Ans. Albert Einstein regards mystery as the most precious element in human experience. Mystery
is the foundation of true art and science. It is the mystery that motivates a person to think and
discover the universe. He also explains that it is the experience of mystery that engenders religion.

Q10: What is his belief concerning the immortality of the soul?

Ans. Einstein is basically an atheist. He denies the concept of punishment and reward of human
beings by their God, after their death so he does not believe in the immortality of soul or life after
death.
 THE DEVOTED FRIEND
(Oscar Wilde)

SUMMARY
One fine morning, an old water-rat came out of his hole and saw a mother duck, trying to teach
its ducklings, how to swim. But the ducklings were not listening to their mother. On this, the
water-rat said, “what disobedient children; they really deserve to be drowned.”
On hearing this remark, the mother duck said, “parents have to be very patient with their
children”. To this, the water-rat replied that he knows nothing about the feelings of parents.
Being a bachelor, he valued friendship most. So, the green linnet narrates the story on, Devoted
Friendship.
There were two friends, little Hans, a gardener and the Miller. The Miller used to visit Hans every
day and take flowers from him and never gave him anything in return. But he never visited Hans
during the Winters as Hans had no flowers. He used to tell his wife, “when people are in trouble,
they should be left alone and not be bothered by visitors”.
After one winter, the Miller visited Hans and on learning that Hans had sold his wheelbarrow he
got very angry with him and then offered his broken wheelbarrow to him. He then said, as I have
given you my wheelbarrow, you will give me your plank of wood. So, he took the plank of wood
and flowers and went home.
The next day the Miller visited Hans, with a large sack of flour on his back, and asked him to sell
it in the market. And he said, “Considering that I am going to give you my wheelbarrow, you
should do something in return.” So, Hans just could not refuse.
Early next morning the Miller came, to get the money for his sack of flour and scolded him for
being in bed. Hans replied that as he was very tired, he laid in bed for a little longer and listening
to the birds sing, as he always worked better after hearing the birds sing. The Miller grabbed the
opportunity and asked him to come over to his mill and mend his barn- roof for him, Again, Hans
could not say, no.
The next day he sent Hans with his sheep, to the mountain for grazing When Hans got back, he
was so tired that he went off to sleep in his chair and did not wake up, till it was broad daylight.
One evening little Hans was sitting by his fireside, when the Miller came over He asked Hans to
get the doctor for him, as his son had hurt his leg Hans agreed to go, and asked him for his lantern
as it was so dark But the Miller refused to give him the lantern saying, it was new, and he would
spoil it in the rain So, Hans went without the lantern.
After three hours he reached the doctor’s house and asked him to go to the Miller’s house as he
needed his services. So, the doctor rode off towards the Miller’s house, while Hans went on his
way. Because of the storm and the rain, Hans lost his way, and fell into a large pool and got
drowned.
At Han’s funeral, everyone was very sad. The Miller shed crocodile tears and pretended to be
very sad. He said that he had as good as given him the wheelbarrow and now did not know what
to do with it He said, in future, he would not be generous because one suffers for being generous.
Thus, the moral of the story is, that, one should not be so stupid as little Hans and get exploited
by the Miller.

Q1. Briefly explain why the story of Hans and the Miller was applicable to the
Water-rat?
Ans. Hans and the Miller are the central characters in the story ‘The Devoted Friend’, written
by Oscar Wilde. This story is told by the Linnet and is definitely applicable to the Water-rat. The
Miller is extremely egocentric (=self-centered). He manipulates little Hans, always taking
advantage of his naiveté (=innocence) and generosity, and never giving anything in return.
Similarly, the Water-rat wants his friend to be devoted to him, but he does not understand what it
means to return the favor. In theory, both the Miller and the Water-rat hold friendship in high
regard, but in practice, they represent one-sided friendship and they are always at the receiving
end.

Q2. How did the Miller justify his not asking Hans to share some of his good things
during the winter?
Ans. Hans and the Miller are the central characters in the story ‘The Devoted Friend’, written by
Oscar Wilde. Poor Hans used to suffer a good deal from cold and hunger in winter because there
were no fruit or flowers in his garden. The Miller never came to see little Hans. Scolding his son,
the Miller justified himself on the basis of his so-called concern for Hans and self-serving theory
of friendship. The Miller says that Hans might get envious of their warm fire, good supper, and a
great cask of red wine. Secondly, Hans might ask to have some flour on credit which the Miller
could not give because he does not want to confuse friendship with flour.

Q3. What was the supreme manifestation of the Miller’s selfishness which caused
Hans to lose his life?
Ans. Hans and the Miller are the central characters in the story ‘The Devoted Friend’, written by
Oscar Wilde. The Miller promised his old wheelbarrow to little Hans. He sent him off on long
errands (=journeys) and got him to help at the mill, but never carried out his promise. However,
the Miller’s selfishness was supremely manifested when he sent Hans to bring the doctor for his
son but refused to lend him his new lantern. The Miller said that it would be a great loss if
something happened to it, but he never realized that the dark, stormy night and the dangerous moor
with a lot of deep holes might claim Hans’s life. While returning from the doctor’s house, Hans
lost his way and wandered off on the moor, and there he drowned.

Q4. Comment briefly on the Miller’s claim to have been Hans’s best friend.
Ans. Hans and the Miller are the central characters in the story ‘The Devoted Friend’, written by
Oscar Wilde. The Miller’s claim to be Hans’s best friend cannot stand examination. He said “Real
friends should have everything in common”, but he never shared anything with poor Hans when
he was starving in winter. He said “when people are in trouble, they should be left alone”, but when
the Miller’s son fell off the ladder, he came to poor Hans for help. When the Miller promised that
he would give little Hans his old wheelbarrow, the Miller said: “generosity is the essence of
friendship”. However, he never carried out his promise. Rather, he expected a great of generosity
from poor Hans. In return of the worthless wheelbarrow, the Miller first took a big plank of
wood, then flowers then sent him on long errands, then got him to work at his mill, and finally sent
him to bring the doctor for his son. Even at Hans’s funeral, the Miller demanded the best place on
account of being his best friend.

Q5: When do we first suspect that the miller was not really a very good friend to Hans?
Ans. We first suspect that the miller was not really a very good friend of Hans when he condemns
his life saying that he would not go to Hans until snow lasted and that he would go when spring
comes so that Hans should have enough flowers to give them.

Q6: How did the Miller’s wife reveal that she too was ready to exploit the generosity of
Hans?
Ans. The Miller’s wife also revealed that she too was really to exploit the generosity of Hans
because when her husband intended to visit Hans to visit in spring seasons she admired her that he
was a good and kind-hearted person. She also gave a basket to him and advised to bring primroses
from Hans garden.

Q7: How did the miller persuade Hans to carry the large sake of flour to market?
Ans. When Hans was busy in his garden in nailing up the creepers and watering the plants the
miller came up and asked Hans to take the sake of floor. When Hans excused him that he was busy
the miller persuaded him by saying that he would give him in wheel-barrow.

Q8: How did the miller justify his rebuke to Hans for staying in bed a little later than
usual after his tiring expedition to the market?
Ans. When the miller found Hans lying on his bed a little later than usual after his turning
expedition to the market he scolded him for being lazy and sluggish. He justified his that sort of
behavior by saying that laziness is a curse and he did not want his friend to be the victim of that
evil.

Q9: Why was Hans unable to look after his garden? What promise was the miller
constantly holding out before him?
Ans. Hans was unable to look after his garden because miller always sends him on long errands
or kept him busy in his mill. He always promised to give him his wheelbarrow.

Q10: What is the effect of the Miller’s disclosure that the wheelbarrow was totally
worthless?
Ans. The worthless and good-for-nothing wheelbarrow which the miller used for his selfish
even did not give him reflect his selfish and mean nature.