English Summary

“To the Foot from its Child” is a poem by William Wordsworth that explores the poet’s deep connection to nature and the spiritual solace he finds in the natural world. The poem reflects on the enduring bond between the adult speaker and the landscape of his childhood. Read more 2nd PUC English Summaries.

To the Foot from its Child Summary

To the Foot from its Child Summary in English

‘To the Foot from its Child’ by Pablo Neruda is a narrative-descriptive poem which narrates the journey of a child’s foot until it becomes an adult foot and beyond until it dies. Besides narrating the experiences of the adult foot until its death, the poem also describes the changes that the child’s foot undergoes until it becomes an adult foot.

The journey of the child’s foot is similar to the ‘journey of life’. The poet uses the ‘foot’ as a metaphor and conveys his view of life. This metaphor helps the poet to convey the idea of how the child’s spirit gets crushed through the challenges and restrictions that life places upon him. Thus, by personifying the foot, the poet expects the reader to compare the experience of the foot to the whole person’s hopes and dreams as well as to the realities of everyday life. By and large one can infer that the poem is basically a criticism of how people force children to grow in society and forget all their dreams and aspirations. The child wants to be a butterfly or an apple, but society is harsh and forces the kid to become a responsible adult doing responsible adult things.

The transition of the child’s foot into an adult foot and then until its death can be studied under four stages conveniently. The four stages are

1. Childhood
2. Experiencing Reality
3. Maturity and
4. Death and Rebirth.

A brief description of each stage is given below:

1. Childhood (Lines 1 – 2):
The first stanza describes the characteristic features of the child’s foot. It is an infant’s foot and it does not know that it is a ‘foot’ at all. It lacks awareness and hence it dreams of unlimited possibilities. It would like to be a ‘butterfly’ or an ‘apple’. The foot has an optimistic view of life.

2. Experiencing Reality (Lines 3 – 16):
Here the poet highlights the impact of time on the child. As the infant’s foot starts growing in the outside world, it begins to experience the harshness and pain of life while walking. When it steps over, “stones and bits of glass, / streets, ladders / and the paths in the rough earth, it learns that its role is that of a foot the same way people become aware of their role in life. It realizes that it can neither fly like a butterfly nor become a bulged apple on the branch of a tree. The child’s foot has now discovered that it is only a ‘foot’, its spirit loses its battle against the world, is taken prisoner, and is condemned to live in a shoe. It also means that the child’s spirit becomes aware of its limitations as a human being and understands its role as a social being in human society.

Now, having been imprisoned in a shoe, it gradually tries to understand the world, in its own way. It is alone and cannot communicate with its counterpart, and gropes blindly in the dark like a blind man. The ‘foot’ is not in the open and whatever ideas it forms about life, are formed in the confined space of the shoe. Here, it means, it is not in touch with reality directly. The society decides what it should understand about ‘life’ or the world outside. Gradually, the foot adapts itself to its world and learns to cope with the harsh realities of life.

3. Maturity (Lines 17 – 46):
In this part of the poem the poet gives a graphic description of the changes seen in the child’s foot during its transition from a child’s foot to ‘adult foot’. The ‘soft nails of quartz’ in the child’s foot gradually grow hard and change themselves into an ‘opaque’ substance ‘hard as horn’. The ‘tiny petaled toes’ of the child’s foot ‘grow bunched and out of trim’. The toes in the adult foot appear like ‘eyeless reptiles’. Later they grow harder and become callused.

In this stanza, the poet attempts to let the reader know that as the child grows into an adult it becomes less open to reality. It also means that people grow harder both physically and emotionally. The phrase ‘faint volcanoes of death’ suggests that the foot comes to appreciate ‘mortality’. Thus, we find that the child’s foot has now been transformed from a beautiful form into a warped and ugly one.

The poet then describes the journey of an adult foot until its death. It is now like an eyeless reptile. Hence he calls it a ‘blind thing’. The adult foot is now in the harsh world outside, suggesting that the adult gets trapped in the routines of everyday life or the humdrum commonality of existence. It is now less capable of enjoyment and finds life difficult in every walk of life. It slogs and slogs either as a man’s foot or as a woman’s foot working in the field or market or mines or ministries. It toils in the shoe, day and night, scarcely finding time to enjoy the pleasures of life or sleep. It works without respite and finally meets with death.

4. Death and Rebirth (Lines 47 – 53):
Soon after the death, the adult foot gets buried. It goes down into the underground. It finds everything dark there. It also does not know that it is dead and has ceased to be a foot. When the foot dies and is buried, its consciousness is childlike again. Therefore, the foot revisits the possibilities of flying like a butterfly or becoming an apple. Here it means that people consider the possibility of an after-life.

To sum up, the freedom of childhood is lost when a person becomes an adult and is exposed to a life of constant work and struggle. Outside, uncontrollable forces have the power to direct one’s life and thus ‘life’ in society takes away people’s free spirits until they are freed again by death. The human promise is not fulfilled by those whom society enslaves and mistreats.

The poet imagines that the naked foot of a boy, innocent still of the habituations of social society does not know that it is a foot, or a butterfly or an apple.

Only through a long process of denial of our embodied natures, beginning with the simple act of wearing shoes and thus denying contact with the earth does the boy become a man. However, upon being buried, he still does not know if he will fly or become an apple.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, “To the Foot from its Child” by William Wordsworth celebrates the timeless connection between the poet and the natural world, emphasizing the profound and lasting influence of childhood experiences on one’s relationship with nature. Through vivid imagery and heartfelt emotions, Wordsworth underscores the enduring impact of nature’s beauty and tranquility on the human soul.

“The Gardener” is a short story by Rabindranath Tagore, a renowned Indian author and Nobel laureate. The story revolves around the central character, an English woman named Helen, who comes to India and develops a deep bond with her Indian gardener. This narrative explores themes of cultural clash, human connection, and the transformative power of nature. Read more 2nd PUC English Summaries.

The Gardener Summary

The Gardener Summary in English

[This short story is the translated English version of ’Thotadavanu’, taken from ‘When Stone Melts and Other Stories’, a collection of short stories published by Sahitya Academi. It is translated into English by H.S. Raghavendra Rao.]

It is said that in these short stories Lankesh shows his preoccupation with human meanness and attempts to explore the evolution of a post-Emergency political and cultural scenario. The title ‘When Stone Melts’ refers to the mystery at the heart of every transformation, the invisible and inescapable play of history and location that engender the process of change.

The narrator addresses the reader directly in the first person asking for an apology for being brief. He says that the story was conceived in a flash and hence if he elaborates it, the story will lose its vitality. There are only four characters, besides the narrator: Tammanna, Basavaiah or Sangoji, and the owner of the coconut grove and his wife.

There are two stories in this story. The first story is narrated by the author in the first person and the second story is narrated by Tammanna who is also the protagonist in the first story. In the second story, the narrator/protagonist tells his own story to the lady distancing himself from the main story.

The narrator says that this story originated in his chance encounter with an old man who was standing in a coconut grove near Chennarayapatna. The old man (who had been employed in the coconut grove), was a labourer, overseer and philosopher, all rolled into one.

One day the old man came to the coconut garden after walking hundreds of miles. Since the owner of that plantation needed a person of his qualifications, he hired him immediately after talking to him for a few minutes. Thus the old man became an employee in the coconut grove and stayed on. The old man did useful work. He was so well-versed in agriculture that he easily understood the problems of workers. The petty thefts in the garden came to an end, and naturally, the income from the garden improved dramatically. Consequently, the increase in income brought a perceptible change in the lifestyle of the owner. The plantation expanded, but the owner became lazy and shied away from hard work.

The owner’s wife found the owner’s behaviour strange and puzzling. She found it hard to decide whether the old man’s arrival was for the better or for the worse. Her husband’s wealth and social prestige had risen higher, and he had acquired a great number of friends in his own village and in the next town as well. Even though he did not do any useful work, his life became crowded with colourful events. On account of his newly acquired clout, he cultivated umpteen other vices including adultery. Though their farm was initially merely ten acres, it had grown beyond their imagination.

Therefore, the owner’s wife realized that financially they had been doing well but her only source of worry was that along with financial improvement, their life was also gradually getting out of hand. Thus, one day when she was in a fix like this, the old man met her. He smiled at her, brought down an offering offender coconuts from a nearby tree, and sat on the embankment of the well. She had no alternative and so she sat next to him. The old man now begins his narrative and takes the action or plot to its climax.

The old man says that, in a far off place, once there lived a man called Tammanna. He had everything: ten acres of land, a comfortable house, and people too ready to carry out his orders or instructions. Besides these possessions, he also had a rival and his name was Sangoji. However, soon after uttering the name Sangoji, the old man started fumbling for words as if he had committed a mistake. The coconut grove owner’s wife, who was listening, felt that it was none of her concern and felt like going away immediately. But, not wishing to hurt the old man, she continued to sit there quietly.

The old man continued his story. He corrected himself once, saying his name was not Sangoji but Basavaiah. [At this moment in the story, the narrator gives a hint to the reader that the old man is telling a true account of his own experience disguising it in the form of a story].

Both Tammanna and Basavaiah were rivals. If Tammanna bought four more acres adjacent to his land, Basavaiah would also do the same. If one of them had ten friends, the other would acquire ‘ fifteen admirers. Though initially, all this looked like healthy competition, it took a nasty turn later.

Their rivalry rose to such a pitch that there was no land left in the village for them to buy. All land belonged to either Tammanna or Basavaiah. Tammanna had one thousand acres and Basavaiah eight hundred. Basavaiah could not tolerate this. His men asked Tammanna to sell two hundred acres but Tammanna refused to do so. On the other hand, Tammanna offered to buy all the land that belonged to Basavaiah. Basavaiah became furious. He went along with his people and acquired two hundred acres of Tammanna’s land forcibly, and got it fenced up all around. Tammanna could not put up with this invasion.

Tammanna’s advisers told him that there were three ways by which Tammanna could get back his land. He could go to the court of law or he could also take recourse to the police. If he did not like to do, either way, he could also use muscle power to get his land back. There was any number of persons ready to attack Basavaiah and wrest his land from him. But Tammanna was in search of a method that could destroy Basavaiah completely. Tammanna got all his experiences composed in the form of ballads and sang them in public. Their rivalry moved away from the visible to the invisible.

Basavaiah could not do the same way. He tried to show his rivalry in doing agricultural tasks more diligently, but that was also in vain. Meanwhile, Tammanna’s reputation started spreading all around. His songs started making mention of Basavaiah’s cruelty and his meanness. Scholars and critics went after his songs and earned their share of fame. Basavaiah became desperate and angry and retaliated by encroaching on more and more of Tammanna’s land. But Tammanna was ignorant of all this and blissfully enjoyed his singing. Art had become the raison d’etre of his life. He was even felicitated as the best poet of his times.

Basavaiah felt humiliated, which he tried to hide by acquiring all kinds of luxuries. He got a palatial mansion built for himself; appointed a number of people to praise him and bedecked himself with gold, diamonds, and other precious stones. But his house looked dull and empty because Tammanna’s books were not there. He attempted to fill the lacuna by inviting scholars, poets, and musicians to his place. This way, he tried to invest his home with meaning.

One day, Basavaiah came to know that Tammanna was ill. The news made him happy. At that point, Basavaiah found the means of surpassing Tammanna. Health is wealth. Tammanna’s disease was Basavaiah’s health. But Tammanna thought differently. He had thought of yet another method of punishing Basavaiah. Tammanna contemplated ‘death’. As long as he continued his rivalry at the level of the body, Basavaiah would go on offering stiff competition. But, if he died, Basavaiah could do nothing to defeat him. The old man ends his storytelling the coconut garden owner’s wife that wishing to destroy Basavaiah completely, Tammanna gave up everything and ran off from his village.

As long as Tammanna was there, Basavaiah had a reason to be alive, but once Tammanna left the place Basavaiah passed away. The old man tells the lady that Basavaiah died because he had no reason to live. Then he confesses to her that he is Tammanna himself. After Basavaiah’s death, Tammanna tells the lady that he forgot all his songs and ballads, lost his fame, and became a non-entity. He concludes telling her that, that way he avenged himself.

Tammanna tells the woman that the experiences of his life had made him realize that human nature is very strange. He sums up his experiences in one sentence. He tells her that though man works to fulfill his many needs like wealth, education, art, and many more things, yet those things do not give him the right, compelling reasons to live. All through his life man lives for some kind of unbearable vengefulness. It is in this vengefulness that he finds a reason for his existence.

Finally, using his autobiographical account as an example, the old man. tries to covertly give her a message. He tells her that her husband was flourishing as a rich man and was not amenable to any advice. Man is so complicated that till the day of his death, he goes on living for some revenge or the other, confronting one challenge or the other. He wants her to understand that she had better try to understand why her husband is living like that.

Finally, he asks her to take the whole story as a dream and hot to take his words seriously. We can infer here that he is saddened by the coconut grove owner’s lifestyle and wants to put an end to it by cautioning the lady about her husband and do something to find out why her husband was doing so. As soon as the old man finishes his story, the first narrator reappears and tells the reader that he had seen all this in a dream and hence he is unable to elaborate.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, “The Gardener” by Rabindranath Tagore is a poignant exploration of the complexities of love and longing in the context of cultural differences. The story beautifully illustrates how the garden serves as a metaphor for the growth and transformation of human emotions. It leaves readers contemplating the profound impact of relationships and the enduring power of nature in the face of societal norms and barriers.

The Karnataka 2nd PUC English summaries provide a comprehensive overview of the literature and language curriculum for 12th-grade students in Karnataka, India. These summaries help students grasp the key themes, plot lines, and literary elements of various texts, enabling a deeper understanding of the subject matter.

Karnataka 2nd PUC English Summaries

• Romeo and Juliet Summary
• Too Dear! Summary
• On Children Summary
• Everything I Need to Know I Learned in the Forest Summary
• A Sunny Morning Summary
• When You Are Old Summary
• The Gardener Summary
• To the Foot from its Child Summary
• Believe that Books will Never Disappear Summary
• Heaven, If you are not here on Earth Summary
• Japan and Brazil through a Traveller’s Eye Summary
• The Voter Summary
• Where there is a Wheel Summary
• Water Summary

It provides students with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in the exams, as well as a deep appreciation for English Summaries. The textbook covers a question and answer help students to understand and analyze the texts in a critical way.

“When You Are Old” poem, Yeats tells a loved one to cherish her youth and beauty, as they will fade with time. He imagines her old age, when she will regret not living her life to the fullest. The poem reminds us that life is fleeting and we should make the most of it. Read more 2nd PUC English Summaries.

When You Are Old Summary

When You Are Old Summary in English

‘When You Are Old’ was written to express the writer’s true and unforgettable love. The theme is a painful one of unrequited love, which the poet manipulates in an interesting manner. Instead of focusing upon the present or the past, the poet looks to the future, a future in which the two people in the poem are destined to be forever apart. The poet imagines an unreal condition that the woman he loved became old and felt regret for refusing his true love.

That is why the poem begins with the presumption that an old and grey lady was sitting beside the fire nodding her head. She is imagined to be reminiscing her memories when she recalls the soft look that her eyes had once, and how many suitors tried to court her, being charmed by her elegance and beauty.

While admitting that many suitors were attracted by her youthful beauty, the speaker tries to tell her that he was the only lover who loved the pilgrim soul in her. He wants her to know that he was attracted by the beauty of her inner self and his love would remain constant even after she grows old. He assures her that he loves even the sorrows of her changing face. He means to say that over a period of time her beauty will have faded away and she will have grown old with her face having shrunk and skin having been wrinkled indicating that she has passed through many difficulties and sorrows.

He concludes visualizing that she is now bending down beside the dying fire, and tells herself in a whisper in a regretful tone that her true love has fled and is hiding his face amid a crowd of stars.

Analysis of the Poem:

‘When You Are Old’ is a short, exquisite, love lyric of twelve lines. It is a sad and introspective poem and is written in a melancholic tone.

The poem is in the form of a direct address by a lover to his lady love. In the poem, there are three stanzas of four lines each with a constant rhyme. The rhyme scheme hints that the speaker/ lover tries to tell her that his love will remain constant even when she grows old.

The most important aspect of this poem is the point of view taken by the narrator. The narrator is asking a woman, who is still young, to imagine a time when she is past her prime youth.

When you are old and gray and full of sleep,
And nodding by the fire, take down this book,
And slowly read, and dream of the soft look
Your eyes had once, and of their shadows deep;

The poet tries to put her mind in the future when she is an ‘old and gray’ woman, ‘full of sleep’, to ‘slowly read’ a book of memories from her youth. As the woman is ‘nodding by the fire’ she leafs through the book (her memories) and recollects her days of’soft looks’ and ‘sorrows’ as she changed.

How many loved your moments of glad grace,
And loved your beauty with love false or true,
But one man loved the pilgrim soul in you.
And loved the sorrows of your changing face;

She remembers her faded beauty that was admired by many but then recalls the only man, the narrator, who loved her for her unique soul. He loved her even as she grew less beautiful and as her personality changed in the fullness of time. The alliteration ‘glad grace’ expresses that when she is young, beautiful and in her best moments of life many will be interested in her, but their love for her will be just false or superficial love. However, the narrator (speaker) will love her anyway no matter what happens to her beauty.

The line “and loved the sorrows of your changing face” suggests that when she gets old her face gets shrunk. So her face looks different but he will just love her with the same love he always had. There is also a contrast between ‘glad grace’ and ‘sorrows of your changing face’, which suggests that while the others love her in her happy times, he will love her every time, including the worst ones.

The phrase ‘pilgrim soul’ in the line, “but one man loved the pilgrim soul in you,” refers to the long walk that her soul has had, searching for real happiness, but really being alone. So, many lovers can love her for how she looks but only he can love her for who she really is. ‘Pilgrim Soul’ has reference to the Biblical belief that every soul is a pilgrim, on the way to salvation and redemption. The speaker, by referring to this aspect of the beloved rather than to her beauty and fame, evokes oneness with the inner and not the external self.

And bending down beside the glowing bars,
Murmur, a little sadly, how Love fled
And paced upon the mountains overhead
And hid his face amid a crowd of stars.

In this stanza, the speaker exhorts the loved one to remember him in later years as she sits beside the fire and bends over the embers of the fire. The onomatopoeic ‘murmur’ suggests a whisper that shows that she has no passion or zest left. This adds to the imagery of age and weariness. ‘A little sadly’ suggests that in later years, as she remembers the speaker, she should feel regretful. The poet uses the word ‘love’ in all the lines in the second stanza and in the third stanza, second line, he capitalizes the word ‘Love’, giving it much intensity. He personifies ‘Love’ in the second line. In the lines,

And paced upon the mountains overhead
And hid his face amid a crowd of stars

‘pacing’ suggests that she was given a chance as ‘Love’ waited for her; it also suggests the gradual diminishing of the love which may then loiter over mountains for a while and then disappear. Being on the ‘mountains overhead’ suggests that ‘Love’ waited on a higher plain than that which she inhabited. Capitalized ‘L’ for love suggests that it is not just a person that she has lost but the ultimate, true, and everlasting possibility of love. The phrase ‘how love fled’ refers to the possibility that the speaker’s love would just fly far away because she is not receptive to his love.

Conclusion:

Yeats’ poem is a bittersweet reminder that youth and beauty are fleeting, and that we should cherish the time we have. It also suggests that we should live our lives to the fullest, so that we have no regrets in old age. The poem is a powerful and moving meditation on the passage of time and the importance of love. It is a reminder that we should not take our loved ones for granted, and that we should cherish them while we can.

“A Sunny Morning“, also explores other themes such as the importance of forgiveness, the power of imagination, and the joy of life. The play is a celebration of human connection and a reminder that it is never too late to find happiness. Read more 2nd PUC English Summaries.

A Sunny Morning Summary

A Sunny Morning Summary in English

‘A Sunny Morning’ is a short, one-act play by Serafin and Joaquin Alvarez Quintero, two renowned Spanish dramatists. It is a romantic comedy which presents the story of Don Gonzalo and Dona Laura who, loved each other in their youth but were forced to separate in life.

On a sunny autumn morning in a quiet corner of a park in Madrid, Dona Laura, a handsome, white-haired lady of about seventy, refined in appearance, is feeding pigeons in the park. Don Gonzalo, a gentleman of seventy, gouty and impatient, enters. Their servants Petra, Dona Laura’s maid, and Juanito come and go nearby.

The conversation between the two seventy-year-olds begins sarcastically, with each accusing the other of encroaching on their private space. Don Gonzalo complains the priests have taken his bench and says Dona Laura is a “Senile old lady! She ought to be at home knitting and counting her beads.” She finds him “an ill-natured old man!” He resigns himself to “sit on the bench with the old lady.”

A pinch of snuff helps to clear their heads, and they find something in common with alternating sneezes of three times each. Dona Laura confides to the audience, “the snuff has made peace between us.”

They begin to banter back and forth in a more friendly manner. Then Don Gonzalo reads out loud from a book of poems. As they converse, Gonzalo says that he is from Valencia and to his surprise, Laura reveals that she is from Maricela where she lived in a villa. Gonzalo is startled by the revelation and he says that he knows a woman named Laura Llorente who lived in a villa there, who was perhaps the most beautiful he had ever seen. Both Laura and Gonzalo realise each other to be former lovers. But they pretend not to reveal their identities.

In her youthful days, Dona Laura was known in her locality as ‘The Silver Maiden’. She was fair as the lily, with jet black hair and black eyes. She was like a dream. She was in love with Gonzalo, the gallant lover. He used to pass by on horseback every morning through the rose garden and toss up a bouquet of flowers to her balcony which she caught On his way back in the afternoon she would toss the flowers back to him. But Laura’s parents wanted to marry her off to a merchant whom she disliked.

One day there was a quarrel between Gonzalo and the merchant, the suitor. After the duel the young man fled from his hometown to Seville and then to Madrid, being scared of the consequences of a duel with a person highly regarded in that locality. Even though he tried to communicate with Laura through letters, all attempts failed.

Now Laura and Gonzalo devise stories of their own deaths. The old Gonzalo says that he is the cousin of the young man. According to him, the young Gonzalo had to leave his place as he was involved in a fight with a merchant, the suitor of Laura. Then he joined the army and went to Africa where he met with a glorious death. The old Laura says that she knows the woman named Laura, known as The Silver Maiden’ and that she was her friend during her young age. She also lies that she knows the tragic story of her love affair with a gallant young man named Gonzalo. The old woman reveals that not finding her lover, the young and beautiful Laura committed suicide.

But, in reality, after three months Gonzalo ran off to Paris with a ballet dancer and Laura, on the other hand, got married after two years. Both realise that they are lying but pretend to be unaware. When the play ends, they agree to meet at the park again, still not acknowledging what they both know to be true.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, “A Sunny Morning” by Serafin and Joaquin Álvarez Quintero is a lighthearted and humorous play that offers a delightful glimpse into the comedic dynamics of a family’s morning routine. Through witty dialogue and clever character interactions, the play highlights the everyday quirks and foibles of family life.

Everything I Need to Know I Learned in the Forest” is a powerful and inspiring essay that continues to resonate with audiences today. It is an essay that can help us to think about our relationship with nature and our responsibility to protect the environment. Read more 2nd PUC English Summaries.

Everything I Need to Know I Learned in the Forest Summary

Everything I Need to Know I Learned in the Forest Summary in English

In the first part of the lesson, the writer narrates how she learnt the basic principles of ecology. She says that her study of ecology started in the forests of the Himalaya because her father was a forest conservator. Hence, she declares that whatever she knows about ecology was learned from the Himalayan forests and ecosystems. Incidentally, her mother who was brought up in Lahore (which became Pakistan later) settled in India after partition and became a farmer.

In the next few paragraphs, she narrates the history of the Chipko’ movement. It was a non-violent response to the large-scale deforestation that was taking place in the Himalayan region in the 1970s. In this context, Vandana Shiva tells us that her involvement in the contemporary ecology movement began with the Chipko movement. During this period, the peasant women from the Garhwal Himalaya had come out in defence of the forests protesting against the ruthless cutting down of trees on a large scale for logging. This had resulted in landslides and floods, scarcity of water, fodder and fuel. Consequently, women had become the worst sufferers because they were in charge of fulfilling the daily requirements for cooking, washing and other household chores. They had to walk long distances for collecting water and firewood which was a heavy burden.

Fortunately, the women had realized that the forests were the real source of springs and streams, food for their cattle and fuel for their hearths. Therefore, the women declared that they would hug the trees, and the loggers would have to kill them before killing the trees. They appealed to the loggers not to cut them and to keep those trees alive.

In 1973 she went to the Himalaya to visit her favourite forests and swim in her favourite stream. She wanted to see these spots before leaving for Canada to do her Ph.D., but the forests were not there and the stream had become a trickle. It was at this moment that she decided to become a volunteer for the Chipko movement. She spent every vacation doing padayatra (walking pilgrimages), documenting the deforestation, the work of the forest activists and spreading the message of Chipko.

Next, the author narrates the Chipko action that took place in the Himalayan village of Adwani in 1977. She recalls how a village woman named Bachni Devi led a movement of resistance against her own husband who had obtained a contract to cut trees. When the logging officials arrived at the forest, the women held up lighted lanterns although it was broad daylight. The forester admonished them saying that they were foolish women and did not know the value of the forest. He added that the forests produced a profit, resin and timber. The women sang back in chorus replying that the forests bore soils, water and pure air and also sustained the Earth and all that she bears.

In the next section titled ‘Beyond Monocultures’, Vandana Shiva tells the readers that she learned about bio-diversity and bio-diversity-based living economies, from the Chipko movement. Further, she remarks that our failure to understand biodiversity and its many functions is the root cause of the impoverishment of nature and culture. Then she says that the lessons she learned about diversity in the Himalayan forests she transferred to the protection of bio-diversity on her farms. She started saving seeds from farmers’ fields and incidentally realized that they needed a farm for demonstration and training. This led to the establishment of Navdanya Farm.

She declares that now they conserve and grow 630 varieties of rice, 150 varieties of wheat, and hundreds of other species. She proudly says that they practice and promote a bio-diversity intensive form of farming that produces more food and nutrition per acre. Finally, she observes that the conservation of biodiversity is, therefore, the answer to the food and nutrition crisis being faced in our country.

The Navdanya organisation helps farmers make a transition from fossil-fuel and chemical-based monocultures to bio-diverse ecological systems nourished by the sun and the soil. She concludes saying that bio-diversity has been her teacher of abundance and freedom, of co-operation and mutual giving.

The second part of the lesson begins with the title ‘Rights of Nature on the Global Stage’.
In the first section, she suggests that we accept nature as a teacher and when we do so we co-create with her and also recognize her agency and her rights. Incidentally, she says that Ecuador has recognized the ‘Rights of Nature’ in its Constitution and calls it a significant step. As a sequel, the United Nations General Assembly organized a conference on harmony with nature as part of Earth Day celebrations in April 2011. She makes a reference to the report of the UN Secretary-General titled ‘Harmony with Nature’, that was issued in conjunction with the conference. The report highlighted the importance of reconnecting with nature.

Vandana Shiva opines that separatism is indeed at the root of disharmony with nature and violence against nature and people. The author supports her statement citing the opinion of Cormac Cullinan, a prominent South African environmentalist. According to him, “apartheid means separateness”. The author says that the whole world joined the anti-apartheid movement in order to end the violent separation of people on the basis of colour. Now that apartheid in South Africa has been put behind us, we need to overcome the wider and deeper apartheid – an eco-apartheid based on the illusion of separateness of humans from nature in our minds and lives.

The author makes an attempt to trace the origin of the idea of separateness. The author recalls our beliefs about the Earth in the pre-industrial era when ‘Man’ believed that living beings were an inseparable part of nature. But, later with the advent of scientific thinking man came under the illusion that the living Earth was dead matter and there was no connection between the living Earth and the other living creatures. Vandana Shiva remarks that it was at this moment in history that the war against the Earth began. She observes that the seeds of separateness were sown when the living Earth was considered as a dead matter to facilitate the industrial revolution.

She adds here that monocultures replaced diversity; ‘raw materials’ and ‘dead matter’ replaced vibrant earth. The Earth came to be termed as Terra Nullius, which means ’empty land’, ready for occupation regardless of the fact that the Mother Earth (Terra Madre) was home to tens of thousands of indigenous peoples (people of different races, tribes, ethnicities).

Vandana Shiva next mentions Carolyn Merchant, a philosopher and historian, in her support and says that “this shift of perspective from nature as a living, nurturing mother to inert, dead and manipulable matter” was well suited to the activities that led to capitalism. Furthermore, Vandana Shiva says that the images of domination of the Earth by scientific methods, created by Francis Bacon and other leaders of the scientific revolution replaced the idea that the Earth nurtures life/living beings. They also successfully removed a cultural constraint on the exploitation of nature. Until then, people did not dare to “readily slay a mother, dig into her entrails for gold, or mutilate her body” as observed by Merchant.

It is to be inferred here that once Francis Bacon popularized the idea that the Earth can serve as a source of raw materials for scientific experiments, many new scientific discoveries and inventions were made which later led to the exploitation of iron, gold, copper, wood and metals from the earth and heralded the industrial revolution, modernization, growth of cities, increase in the number of rich people and urban culture, displacing other cultures.

In the next section titled ‘What Nature Teaches’, Vandana Shiva tells the reader what we need to do now. She says that we are facing multiple crises and hence we need to move away from the paradigm of nature as dead matter and move towards an ecological paradigm. Vandana Shiva tells us that to understand what an ecological paradigm means, we need to go to ‘nature’ herself and nature is the best teacher.

Vandana Shiva presents a model of the Earth University which she says is located at ‘Navdanya’, a bio-diversity farm. She says that Earth University teaches Earth democracy. The concept of Earth Democracy symbolizes “freedom for all species to evolve within the web of life”. It also refers to the freedom and responsibilities of humans as members of the Earth family, to recognize, protect and respect the rights of other species.

Vandana Shiva explains that the idea of ‘Earth Democracy’ is a shift from anthropocentrism to eco-centrism. Anthropocentrism is a school of thought which argues that humans are the central element of the universe. Now we need to accept that ‘eco-systems’ are the main elements of the universe and not Man, and the Earth nurtures diverse eco-systems. It also means that it is man’s responsibility to preserve these ecosystems. Since we all depend on the Earth for our survival, Earth democracy gives every human being rights to food and water, to freedom from hunger and thirst.

Vandana Shiva mentions the activities at Navdanya. She says that it is a bio-diversity farm where participants learn to work with living seeds, living soil, and the web of life.

In the next section titled ‘The Poetry of the Forest’, Vandana Shiva talks about the original source of the idea of ‘The Earth University’. She states that the concept of Earth University originated from Rabindranath Tagore’s Shantiniketan in West Bengal. Tagore started a learning centre in Shantiniketan in West Bengal as a forest school. The school became a university in 1921, growing into one of India’s most famous centres of learning. Vandana takes this forest school as a model and tells the readers that just as in Tagore’s time, we need to turn to nature and the forest for lessons in freedom. Then she refers to Tagore’s essay ‘Tapovan’ (Forest of Purity) in which Tagore has expressed his understanding of the Indian civilization.

Tagore asserts that India’s best ideas have come from where the man was in communion with trees and rivers and lakes, away from the crowds. He adds that the peace of the forest has helped the intellectual evolution of man. Furthermore, he says that the culture that has arisen from the forest has been influenced by the diverse processes of renewal of life and these processes of renewal of life are always at play in the forest, varying from season to season, in sight, sound and smell. This culture of the forest has fueled the culture of Indian society.

Vandana Shiva says that unity in diversity is the basis of both ecological sustainability and democracy. She adds that this is true of both nature and culture, and through our relationship with the forest we are united with nature.

Vandana Shiva further elaborates the features of the culture of the forest. She refers to Tagore’s writings and says that in his writings the forest was not just the source of knowledge and freedom, but was also the source of beauty and joy, of art and aesthetics, of harmony and perfection. It symbolized the universe. Vandana Shiva says that the forest teaches us union and compassion. It also teaches us ‘enoughness’. It means, it teaches us the principle of equity. It shows us how to enjoy the gifts of nature without exploitation. Furthermore, she says that no species in a forest takes away the share of another species and every species sustains itself in co-operation with others. She concludes saying that the end of consumerism and accumulation is the beginning of the joy of living.

Finally, Vandana rounds off her article saying that the conflict between greed and compassion, conquest and co-operation, violence and harmony continues even today and in this situation, it is the forest that can show us the way beyond this conflict. Thus, Vandana Shiva wants to assure us that the forests teach us the values of diversity, freedom and co-existence.

Conclusion:

Vandana rounds off her article saying that the conflict between greed and compassion, conquest and co-operation, violence and harmony continues even today and in this situation, it is the forest that can show us the way beyond this conflict. Thus, Vandana Shiva wants to assure us that the forests teach us the values of diversity, freedom and co-existence.

“On Children” is a poem written by Kahlil Gibran that delves into the theme of parenthood and the relationship between parents and their children. In this poignant piece, Gibran reflects on the idea that children are not possessions but rather individuals with their own destinies. On Children poem explores the idea that parents are like bowmen, and their children are the arrows aiming for a future yet unknown. Read more 2nd PUC English Summaries.

On Children Summary

On Children Summary in English

‘On Children’ is an excerpt from ‘The Prophet’, one of Kahlil Gibran’s most popular works. ‘The Prophet1 includes twenty-six sermons on varied topics like Love, Marriage, Children, Houses, Clothes, Laws, Crime and Punishment, Buying and Selling, etc. The sermons are given by Almustafa who speaks in the persona of the poet.

‘Almustafa’ means the ‘chosen one’. The name also implies that he possesses spiritual knowledge and divine characteristics. Almustafa is a man of inner purity and is believed to be the ‘Perfect man’ or the universal man’.

In the opening sermon titled ‘The Coming of the Ship’, we learn that Almustafa has waited twelve years in the city of Orphalese for the ship that was to return and bear him back to the isle of his birth. The ship has arrived and he is about to go onboard. Before he boards the ship he is met by a woman named ‘Almitra’, who is a seeress. She prays to him to speak to the people of Orphalese about all that he has been shown about what lies between birth and death. Each of the 26 sermons is the reply given by Almustafa to all those who request him to speak about a particular topic.

‘On Children’ is one such sermon given by Almustafa to a woman holding a babe against her bosom, when she asks him to speak to the people ‘Of Children’. Almustafa begins his sermon with the opening line ‘Your children are not your children’.

In this imaginary conversation, there are fourteen lines of which five lines are devoted to enlightening the parents about what / who the children are and the remaining lines to explaining what role the parents should play in bringing up their children.

Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you, yet they belong not to you.
They have their own thoughts.

The speaker wants to make the parents aware that a child is a gift from the abundance of existence and it is eternal life itself. Just as we have seen eternal life flowing through mountains, through forests and through plains, children are born as sons and daughters as Life’s longing for itself. Life longs to reproduce itself, and we are its servants who carry out that master plan.

Parents do not create them and hence parents cannot possess them. Parents may have brought them to this world because they have been chosen to serve as ‘passage’ or vehicle to bring the children to this world. They are only the medium through which life expresses itself. Children are closer to the very source of life than old people. Furthermore, children have their own thoughts because they have the free will to do as they please.
In the next few lines, the speaker educates parents as to how they should treat their children.

You may give them your love, but not your thoughts
You may house their bodies but not their souls
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams
You may strive to be like them, but seek not to make them like you
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

Almustafa tells parents that they can only act as ‘Stewards’ and their role is one of stewardship’; parents should not treat their children as their puppets but shower their love as much as they can and take good care of them as we do to someone who is given to our charge. Parents should take care of their needs only and should not impose their thoughts and ideas on them. They should not do so because our children belong to the future whereas we belong to the past generation.

As parents, our days are over. Parents may try to be like their children but their past acts like a barrier. On the contrary, children belong to the future. Since parents belong to the yesterdays, and their children belong to the tomorrows, parents cannot conceive of their future. Hence they should not burden their children with their dead past, their scriptures and their saints. The children will have their own scriptures and saints, parents should only give them as much love as they can. The present is a meeting point but also a point of departure. Every day the gap between parents and their children will become bigger and bigger.

And so, parents should not thrust their past as an inheritance on their children. The children have their own future and we should let them grow according to their own potential. The children are closer to existence than we are. Since life looks forward and does not linger on, parents should let their children build their future, realize their potential and resist the temptation to force their children to be like their carbon copy.

KSEEB Solutions

In the next few lines, Almustafa, the speaker, tries to give a visual account of how we should play our role as parents and how we can win God’s love:

You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite, and He bends you with His might that His arrows may go swift and far
Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies, so also He loves the bow that is stable.

Almustafa tells the parents that God uses parents as his instrument to send ‘living arrows’ to the earth. God or the Supreme Being is the archer, the parents are the bows and the children are his living arrows. An arrow does not have its own power nor does it create its own path of direction. Both these are provided by God. The archer is God and the path is infinity. Just like the archer, God decides the mark on the infinite path for each child as its destination and using the parents as bows, shoots the arrows. Like an archer, God bends the bows (which are the parents) testing them for stability. The bows must help the arrows to reach their destination.

Existence wants parents to bend like a bow before their own children because they have to travel far and they have to give them strength. Parents should not despise the tests God provides in the image of children, for these tests only make God love the parents more. The speaker wishes us to know that existence loves both parents and children because parents are also children of the same existence. God loves not only parents who are stable, but he also loves children who as arrows will be bows in the future and shoot their own arrows.

At the end of the sermon, the speaker says that while the archer loves the arrows (the children), “He also loves the bow that is stable”, which presents before the reader a paradox. As parents involved in the care of children, Gibran appears to be asking us to be strong and bendable at the same time.

This may seem like a contradictory idea, but if we examine the metaphor of the bow, it begins to make sense. The bow has to be able to withstand the force of its string being drawn back. To do this without snapping in two, the bow also has to have strength. This tensile strength allows the arrow being held on the string to be released with optimal energy as it creates balance through resistance and tension, not unlike the kind of discipline we try to adjudicate in the making and breaking of boundaries for our children either at home or in the classroom. Such discipline uses rules and regulations as guides that will hopefully enhance a child’s sense of freedom by engendering a balanced sense of responsibility within him or her as well.

Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies.
So He loves also the bow that is stable.

These lines imply that God, the archer, loves parents who give their children roots to grow in and the freedom to fly when their time has come to do so. He loves those who slowly step back and set them free as their children grow up, encouraging them to learn from their own experiences and to dream their own dreams. He expects parents to do all they can to help their children to fulfill their own highest potential.

The archer expects wise parents to tell the children in their care that they are the children of God and that therefore each child is as precious and unique as the other. Further, God expects parents to respect their children because they know that even when a child is still living in a smaller body than their own, it has nonetheless come into their world as a frilly developed soul and spirit in its own right, who may have a long history of evolution behind it that could have taken more lifetimes than those of its parents.

God expects wise parents to tell their children that they have come into this life to learn, evolve, and grow some more through their own experiences. When their children go to school, wise parents point out to them that they are learning for themselves and for life itself, not only for this lifetime but for Eternity. He expects wise parents to explain to their children the laws of the universe and that because of this, whatever anyone sends out to life has to return to them. Finally, God expects parents to teach children by their good example.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, we may say that in this sermon (‘On Children’) Gibran illustrates how love works in the intimate relationship of parenthood.

“Too Dear!” is a short story by Guy de Maupassant that tells the story of a king who is faced with a difficult decision. A murderer has been sentenced to death, but the king is hesitant to execute him because it would be too expensive. The king eventually decides to commute the murderer’s sentence to life in prison, but he soon realizes that this is even more expensive. In the end, the king is forced to release the murderer, who then goes on to commit more crimes. Read more 2nd PUC English Summaries.

Too Dear! Summary

Too Dear! Summary in English

‘Too Dear!’ is a fascinating short story by Count Leo Tolstoy, a famous Russian writer. It is adapted from an episode in Guy de Maupassant’s work ‘Sur L’eau’ in French (translated into English ‘Afloat’) and translated from Russian by Louise Maud and Aylmer Maud.

The story is a parody of one of the modem systems of governance. It ridicules ways of bringing criminals to book and dispensing justice in modern states. The story is narrated in a matter of fact tone but with an undercurrent of sarcasm.

The story begins with the description of a place, its people, and its system of governance. There is a tiny little kingdom called Monaco near the borders of France and Italy. There are only about seven thousand inhabitants in Monaco. The kingdom is so small that if all the land in the kingdom were divided among its inhabitants, there would not be even an acre of land for each inhabitant. But this toy kingdom has a real kinglet and like any other real king, he lives in a palace with courtiers, ministers, a bishop, generals, and an army of only sixty men in all.

The king lives by collecting taxes from the people. There are taxes on tobacco, wine, and spirits and a poll tax too. However, the number of people living in his kingdom being very small, the taxes the people pay for their ‘drinking’ and ‘smoking’ are not adequate enough to feed the king’s courtiers, and officials and to keep himself. Therefore the king had hit upon a new source of revenue. It came from a gaming house, where people play roulette. The keeper of the gaming house got a percentage on the turnover irrespective of whether people lost or won. Out of his profits, the gaming housekeeper paid a large sum to the kinglet.

Incidentally, it is the only gaming house that is left untouched by the rulers in Europe and hence the gambling housekeeper pays so much money to the prince. There were many such gaming houses run by German sovereigns but some years ago they were forbidden to do so. The rulers stopped such gaming houses because they did a great deal of harm to the people. Many a time, it so happened that a man would come and try his luck, then he would risk all he had and lose it. He would finally drown or shoot himself. However, there was no one to stop the Prince of Monaco, and he remained with a monopoly of the business. So now, whoever wants to gamble goes to Monaco and the prince gains a lot of money this way. The Prince of Monaco knows that earning revenue this way is a dirty business but he feels helpless because he has to live.

Though the kinglet knows that collecting taxes on people’s ‘drinks’ and ‘tobacco’ is bad yet he is collecting taxes. In the same way, the Prince is living on the revenue he gets from the gaming house. He lives, reigns, rakes in the money, and holds his court with all the ceremony of a real king. He has his coronation and his levees. He rewards, sentences, and pardons. He also has his reviews, councils, laws, and courts of justice just like other kings, but only on a smaller scale.

In the next part of the story, we see the moral conflict faced by the Prince and his people. A murder was committed in the Prince of Monaco’s domains. The people of Monaco were peaceable and such a thing had not happened before. Like in other countries there was a legal system in place in Monaco also. The criminal was tried according to the procedures of law. The lawyers argued and the judges finally decreed that the criminal be executed as directed by the law. The prince read out the sentence, confirmed it, and ordered the execution of the criminal.

The story now takes a serious and interesting turn. There arose a problem in the execution of the king’s order. Monaco was a toy kingdom and it did not have either a guillotine for cutting heads off or an executioner, the man designated to carry out the execution. The ministers sent a letter of inquiry to the French Government, asking whether they could lend them a machine and an expert to cut off the criminal’s head and also inform the cost involved in it. They received a reply a week later informing them that the French Government would lend them a machine and an expert as well, and it would cost 16000 francs. The king felt that sixteen thousand francs was a lot of money and it was utterly a waste of money to spend so much on beheading a wretched criminal.

The king felt that the people would not accept his decision and if he forced them there might be a riot Therefore, the king called a council and asked them their suggestion. It was decided to send a similar inquiry to the King of Italy. They wrote to the king of Italy and they received a prompt reply. The Italian government informed them that they would supply both a machine and an expert at a cost of 12000 francs including travelling expenses. Though the price quoted by the king of Italy was cheaper than that of the French government, still the price was too much for a toy kingdom like theirs. Therefore, the ministers called another council and discussed the matter.

The council asked the General of the army to find a soldier who would be ready to cut off a man’s head. The members of the council believed that the soldiers have been trained for such a job. The general discussed the matter with his soldiers to see whether one of them would agree to do that job. But the soldiers did not agree to do it because they had not been taught how to behead a criminal.

The king and the ministers met again and discussed the matter thoroughly. Finally, they came to the conclusion that the best thing to do was to alter the death sentence to one of imprisonment for life. This way it would enable the prince to show his mercy and it would also be cheaper. The prince agreed to this and so the matter was arranged accordingly. Though there was no suitable prison for a man sentenced for life, they managed to find a place that would serve as a prison and put the criminal in it. They also placed a guard over him. The guard had to watch the criminal and had also to fetch his food from the palace kitchen. This way, they kept the prisoner imprisoned for more than a year. The whole arrangement of keeping a guard to watch over the criminal and feeding the criminal cost more than 600 francs a year.

One day, while the kinglet was examining the account of his income and expenditure, the new item of expenditure caught his eye. He got worried and so he summoned his ministers and urged them to find some cheaper way of dealing with the criminal. The ministers again met and discussed ways of reducing the expenditure. Finally, they all came to the conclusion that the guard could be dispensed with so that the expenditure on his salary could be saved. They went to the extent of saying “let the prisoner run away and be hanged”. The ministers conveyed their decision to the kinglet and the kinglet gave his consent to it.

Accordingly, the guard was dismissed; but they all waited to see how the prisoner would react. At dinner time the criminal came out, and not finding his guard, he went to the Prince’s kitchen to fetch his own dinner. After collecting his dinner, he returned to the prison, shut the door on himself, and stayed inside. He did not show any signs of running away and this got the ministers worried. The criminal was brought before the Minister of Justice. He suggested to the prisoner to run away. He even told him that if he ran away, the prince would not mind it The prisoner told the minister that he had nowhere to go and accused them of ruining his character by sentencing him to death.

Secondly, he told them that having been confined to the prison, he had given up his habit of working. He actually resented their action in not executing him. He finally told them that he would not like to agree to their proposal that he should run away and escape. The minister felt helpless.

Once more the council was summoned and the criminal’s issue was discussed again. They came to the conclusion that the only way they could get rid of him was by offering him a pension. The ministers decided to pay the prisoner a fixed sum of600 francs as a pension. On receiving the news, the prisoner told them that he would go away on that condition but they must undertake to pay it regularly.

Finally, the prisoner received one-third of his annuity in advance and left the king’s dominions. He emigrated to another country just across the frontier. He bought a bit of land, started market gardening, and lived there comfortably.

The narrator comments jovially that it is a good thing that the prisoner did not commit his crime in a country where they do not grudge expense to cut a man’s head off, or to keep him in prison for life. The author seems to question the very conviction of the rulers about the system of law and governance instituted by the rulers of big nations. The author seems to appreciate the courage and open-mindedness of Monaco in acknowledging their limitations and letting free the prisoner on humanitarian grounds. It is worth noting that the writer puns on the words ‘Too Dear!’. It means either ‘too expensive’ or ‘of great value’. The author leaves it to the reader to decide whether ‘Too Dear!’ refers to executing a criminal or saving a criminal’s life.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, “Too Dear!” serves as a cautionary tale about the destructive nature of unchecked greed and the pursuit of material possessions. Pahom’s tragic fate serves as a stark reminder of the importance of moderation and contentment in one’s pursuit of wealth and happiness.

Romeo and Juliet” is a tragic love story written by William Shakespeare early in his career about two teenagers from feuding families who fall in love at first sight. Despite the obstacles in their way, Romeo and Juliet are determined to be together, but their secret marriage leads to a series of tragic events that ultimately end in their deaths. Read more 2nd PUC English Summaries.

Romeo and Juliet Summary

Romeo and Juliet Summary in English

Background-I

‘Romeo and Juliet’ presents the tragic story of two young lovers Romeo and Juliet, who belong to two powerful noble families of Verona, the Montagues, and the Capulets. The two noble families harbour grudges against each other and have been fighting each other as sworn enemies for a long time.

The action starts with a street brawl between the servants of the two rival families, who are later joined by the heads of the families, the Montagues and the Capulets, themselves. Prince Escalus, 5 who arrives on the scene, admonishes them, restores order, and threatens death to any member of either family found indulging in street fights, in the future. Then he leaves the place taking Lord Capulet along with him.

Only Lord and Lady Montague and Benvolio, their nephew, remain there as the others depart. Lord Montague tells Benvolio that Romeo has been in a bad mood for quite a while, weeping and mooning, staying out all night but going into the house as soon as the sun rises, locking himself in his room with the curtains drawn as if to make ‘himself an artificial night’. Benvolio assures him that he will attempt to find out what is bothering Romeo.

Next, we find Paris, a young relative of Prince Escalus, engaged in a conversation with Lord Capulet. Paris wishes to marry 14-year-old Juliet, the only daughter of the Capulets. Lord Capulet tells Paris that Juliet is yet too young to marry, but tells Paris that he will not oppose the marriage if Paris can win Juliet’s consent. Incidentally, Lord Capulet invites Paris to a feast to be held at his house that evening.

Meanwhile, Benvolio meets Romeo and learns that Romeo is madly in love with Rosaline, who does not love him and insists on remaining chaste.

Next, we learn that Lord Capulet has given his servant a list of guests whom he has to see and ensure that they are invited to the Capulets’ party that evening. But the servant cannot read the names in the list and hence asks two strangers in the street to read. The two strangers are none other than Romeo and Benvolio. Romeo reads out the names of the guests and incidentally learns that fair Rosaline, with whom he is madly in love, is also one of the guests in the party. Romeo and Benvolio decide to ‘crash’ the party. As planned, Romeo and Benvolio gain entry into the party along with a retinue of masked entertainers and torchbearers.

While the guests are engaged in dancing, Romeo happens to see Juliet dancing with a gentleman. Romeo is awestruck by her beauty and tries to find out from a servant, who she is. It is at this juncture that Romeo says these lines.
The lines spoken by Romeo are taken from Act I Scene V when Romeo happens to see Juliet for the first time in the party hosted by the Capulets. Both Romeo and Juliet do not know each other.

Summary – I Romeo’s Speech

Romeo stands apart and rapturously praises her beauty. His words appear to come from someone who has not seen anyone so beautiful as Juliet before. It is night and the room is lit with torches. Romeo exclaims and says that Juliet is brighter than the blaze of the torches. It implies that her brightness outshines the torches and has lit up the hall. In the next two lines again there is a reference to the darkness of the night and the brightly shining lady. Romeo compares Juliet to a jewelled earring hanging against the cheek of an African.

Here again, it implies that Juliet is conspicuously seen amidst others because of her brightness. Romeo is so enchanted with her goddess-like beauty that he declares that she is too beautiful for this world and too beautiful to die and be buried. In the next line, he eulogizes her beauty saying that she outshines the other women like a white dove in the middle of a flock of crows.

Romeo is so overwhelmed by her beauty that he tells himself that when that dance is over, he will watch her where she stands and will touch her hand and make his coarse hand (compared to Juliet’s) blessed. Then he asks himself a question whether his heart loved anyone before that moment. Then he tells himself that if it was true then he would renounce it because he had never felt so much in love because he had never seen anyone truly beautiful like Juliet until that night.

Background-II

(Having slipped away from his friends, Romeo lingers in Capulet s garden under Juliet’s window, and overhears her confess to the stars that she loves him. He reveals his presence to her, and in an ardent love scene, they resolve to be married secretly. The next day, Juliet sends her nurse, of whom she has made a confidante, to make final arrangements, and the wedding is performed at the cell of Friar Laurence, Romeo’s friend. The two lovers depart hoping to meet each other in Juliet’s chamber that night.

Returning from his wedding, Romeo comes upon his friends, Benvolio and Mercutio, in an altercation with Tybalt, who has been seeking Romeo because of his intrusion at the ball. Tybalt does his best to pick a fight, but Romeo, remembering that now Tybalt is his kinsman, refuses to quarrel.

Mercutio, however, who do not understand Romeo’s softness, takes the quarrel upon himself, and when Romeo and Benvolio try to beat down their weapons is slain by Tybalt. Aroused by the death of his best friend, Romeo throws aside his lenity, slays Tybalt, and flees as the angry citizens begin to gather.

Then we come to Act III Scene II, where we find Juliet waiting in her father’s orchard for her husband, Romeo’s, arrival. Juliet, unaware of what has just happened, waits out the passing of the day. She is more impatient than ever, for, that night Romeo is to come to her as her husband. At the opening of the scene, Juliet delivers an impassioned soliloquy, popularly known as ‘Juliet’s invocation to the night’. In her soliloquy, Juliet urges the sun on to its setting in the West, so that night may arrive sooner. She longs for the shelter of darkness when Romeo can come to her unseen. The dark suits lovers, for love, is blind and the beauty of lovers is enough light for them. There are 31 lines in this soliloquy but only 9 lines (lines 17 to 25) are prescribed for your study.

Whereas Romeo’s speech highlights the mesmerising physical beauty of Juliet, Juliet’s soliloquy highlights Juliet’s intensity of love for Romeo.

Summary-II Juliet’s soliloquy

In these nine lines, Juliet invokes both ‘night’ and ‘Romeo’ as well. She addresses Romeo as ‘day in the night’ because his presence will shine out against the darkness. She visualizes night like a bird j and believes that Romeo will come gliding on the wings of the night like ‘new snow’ on a raven’s back. She addresses the night appealingly calling it ‘gentle night’ and ‘black-browed night’. She implores it to bring her Romeo to her. After that, when she dies, she asks the night to take him and set him up in heaven with the stars so that he will make the face of heaven beautiful and charming. She hopes that when that happens ‘all the world will be in love with night, and it will not pay attention to the overbright or lurid sun.

The soliloquy is based on the unifying images of night and light. Juliet courts this night, which by its darkness will allow Romeo’s safe journey to her. The only light she needs is Romeo himself, who is ‘day in the night’. The light of the day and the ‘garish sun’ offer nothing to her; they are only ‘tedious’. It is a night that is ‘loving’, for it blesses her love with its darkness and silence and lets that love shine out. Even the stars, emblems of the fate she does not recognize, seem to be good to her. Romeo will be made eternal by the stars. Juliet’s speech is like singing in the face of death. Thus, Juliet hastens the coming of her wedding night.

In short, love belongs to Juliet, now that she is married, but she does not own it, and she can’t own love until Romeo possesses her. That is why she is waiting now as impatiently as a child waits for a festival.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, “Romeo and Juliet” remains an enduring masterpiece, showcasing the destructive consequences of feuding and intolerance while celebrating the power of youthful love. Shakespeare’s exploration of love’s transcendence and the tragic inevitability of fate continues to resonate with audiences worldwide.