English Summary

We have decided to create the most comprehensive English Summary that will help students with learning and understanding.

Albert Einstein At School Summary in English by Patrick Pringle

Albert Einstein At School by Patrick Pringle About the Author

Albert Einstein At School Summary in English

Young Albert Einstein was studying for his diploma in a school in Munich, Germany. He hated learning dates and facts by heart. This forever displeased Mr Braun, his history teacher. Despite his teacher telling him the date of the year that the Prussians had defeated the French at Waterloo, Albert failed to recall them. He candidly confessed that he did not see any point in learning dates as they could be looked up in books.

The teacher was infuriated and said that it applied to most of the facts taught at school. He also taunted him calling his views the “Einstein theory of education”. Albert argued that it was ideas that were important. He was not interested in knowing when the battles were fought but why they were fought.

Mr Braun was shocked and furious. He believed that Albert had no desire to learn and was wasting his father’s money. He punished him by detaining him for an extra period at school. Albert was miserable when he went to his lodging. His father, being poor, had got him a room in an area that was ugly. Albert had no comfort there and did not like the food there. The atmosphere was bad as his landlady kept beating her children and her husband came drunk and beat her. All this made him miserable and what was worse, he had to go to a school that he hated.

Albert was interested in reading books on science. He read about geology that was not taught in school. His cousin Elsa pointed out to him that it would not help him pass his diploma but he said that he did so because he liked reading. He also liked playing the violin and played it till the landlady stopped him. Also, the wailing and howling of the children irritated him.

He had only two friends—Elsa and Yuri. Elsa lived in Berlin, where her father had his business. She visited him occasionally. She encouraged him in his studies and tried to assure him that it was not difficult to pass his examination. All he had to do was learn like a parrot, like stupid boys who did that and passed.

Yuri was a student, who shared his accommodation with the others, and felt Einstein was fortunate to have one to himself. Yuri also told him about the uncivilised students who studied with him, who fought with one another. The authorities did not take action and merely told them not to engage in these fights.

Albert told Yuri, he was convinced that he did not want to continue school but if he went back to Milan he would be sent back. He had a plan. If a doctor certified that he had a nervous breakdown and it would be bad for him to go back there, he could get away from it.

Yuri knew of no doctors but referred him to his friend, a medical student, Ernst Weil. He asked Albert to tell him of his problem honestly. Albert was a sensitive boy and worry made him nervous. By the time, he went to the doctor, Yuri had told him everything. The doctor had been a student till recently and understood his problem. He said that had Albert not been close to a nervous breakdown he would not have gone to a doctor. So he certified that Albert keep away from school for six months.

Albert took Yuri to supper for this favour but Yuri informed him that eventually he would have to go back to school. But Albert decided to meet the head teacher and said that he hoped to get a recommendation from his teacher of mathematics, Mr Koch. On Yuri’s advice he went to Mr Koch first. Mr Koch admired Albert and confessed that he could not teach Albert anymore, rather he could leam from him. Albert got a recommendation from him that said, he was fit to join an institute for higher education in mathematics.

However, before he could go to the head teacher, he was summoned. The teacher informed him that he was not prepared to keep him in school, as his work was horrible, he was a rebel and hindered teaching work in class. Albert did not have to use his medical certificate as he was expelled from school. He was happy leaving the place where he had spent five miserable years.

He just wanted to meet Yuri before leaving as Elsa was in Berlin. Yuri hoped that he would be happy in Milan.

Albert Einstein At School Summary Questions and Answers

Question 1.
“I think it’s not facts that matter, but ideas.” To whom did Einstein say this and why?
Answer:
Einstein said it to Mr Braun, the history teacher, in his Munich school. He hated learning dates and facts by heart. He argued that ideas were more important than rote learning. He was not interested in knowing when the battles were fought but why they were fought.

Question 2.
Do you think Albert is being impolite while answering the history teacher’s questions? Give your reasons.
Answer:
Though Albert addresses his history teacher politely, he is being impudent. If he did have a problem, he should have spoken to the teacher separately. Questioning the teacher’s views on education in a class was impolite and rude.
OR
Albert addresses his history teacher politely. His answers are straightforward and blunt but his opinions are strong. A firm conviction cannot be termed as rudeness.

Question 3.
What characteristic of Einstein’s nature is highlighted by the exchanges between him and the teacher?
Answer:
The exchanges between Einstein and the teacher show him to be a person with firm convictions; he is frank and straightforward. Even at the cost of punishment he is not willing to compromise on his views. He comes across as one who will chart his own course rather than follow the beaten track.

Question 4.
Why did Albert see no point in learning dates and facts?
Answer:
Einstein told Mr Braun, the history teacher, “I think it’s not facts that matter, but ideas.” He hated learning dates and facts by heart. He argued that ideas were more important than learning by rote. He was not interested in knowing when the battles were fought but why they were fought.

Question 5.
What was Einstein’s reaction to the history teacher’s sarcasm?
Answer:
Mr Braun, his history teacher, was unhappy with Albert unwilling to leam facts or dates. When he admitted that he did not see any point in learning dates, the teacher taunted him by calling his views the ‘Einstein theory of education’. Albert argued that it was ideas that were important but nevertheless, felt miserable.

Question 6.
Why did Albert feel miserable when he left school that day?
Answer:
When he left school that day, Albert felt miserable because his day at school, like most other days, had been bad and he had gotten into an argument with his teacher for which he had been punished. Secondly, he had to go back to the same school the next day. Moreover, the idea of going back to his lodgings with the atmosphere of domestic violence did not cheer him up.

Question 7.
Why and what did his history teacher report to the head teacher?
Answer:
Mr Braun was shocked and furious with Albert’s candid reply. He believed that Albert had no desire to learn and was wasting his father’s money. He punished Albert by detaining him after school. He also reported to the head teacher that his work was horrible; he was a rebel and hindered teaching work in class.

Question 8.
Albert was equally unhappy at his lodging. Why?
Answer:
Albert was miserable at his lodging. His father was a man of modest means, had got him a room in an ugly area. Albert.had no comfort and did not like the food there. The atmosphere was bad as his landlady kept beating her children and her husband came drunk and beat her.

Question 9.
What did Yuri say to him about violence in the hostel?
Answer:
Yuri told Einstein that he was fortunate to have an accommodation to himself. The people around him were poor but not uncivilized like the ones with whom he shared his accommodation. Yuri also told him about the uncivilized students, sharing his accommodation, who fought. The authorities did not take action but merely told them not to do so.

Question 10.
Who was Elsa? What was her advice to Albert?
Answer:
Elsa was Einstein’s cousin who lived in Berlin. She visited him of and on. She encouraged him in his studies and tried to assure him that it was not difficult to pass his examination. All he had to do was learn like a parrot, like the stupid boys who did that and passed.

We have decided to create the most comprehensive English Summary that will help students with learning and understanding.

Ranga’s Marriage Summary in English by Masti Venkatesha Iyengar

Ranga’s Marriage by Masti Venkatesha Iyengar About the Author

Ranga’s Marriage Summary in English

Thfe title ‘Ranga’s Marriage’ seems more out of place than ‘Ranganatha Vivaha’ or ‘Ranganatha Vijaya’. But it is very appropriate as it is about Ranga’s marriage—a simple young boy from Hosahalli village. Hosahalli is yet another unfamiliar name as the English writers do not know of the existence of such a place and hence do not mention it. Most people are like sheep who follow others blindly. Hence, when neither the English writers nor the geographers referred to it, the cartographer did not put it on the map. However, the narrator feels Hosahalli is an important place in Mysore State.

Even Dr Gundabhatta who has visited many places thinks the same about this village. He feels that the raw mango trees in the village have such an extreme potency of sourness that they can certainly give a terrible cough. Just as the mango is special, so is everything else around the village. There is a creeper in the water of the village pond whose flowers are a feast to behold and its leaves are large enough to serve a meal on. The narrator, Shyama, feels that he is not given to rambling but when the topic of their village comes up, he can go on endlessly. He says if one wishes to visit the place then all one has to do is write to him.

He would tell them where Hosahalli is and what things are like here.

However, he would like to,share something that happened ten years ago. Unlike the present, ten years back most people did not know English. These days, people import a lot of English words into the language. This “priceless commodity, the English language”, the narrator says, was not so widespread in the village a decade ago.

The village accountant was the first person in the village to send his son, Rangappa (called Ranga), to Bangalore to study. Hence, Ranga’s homecoming was a great occasion. People announced his coming and also went to have a look at him. Fascinated by1 the crowd that was going to Ranga’s place, the narrator, too, went with them. Seeing so many people, Ranga came out with a smile on his face. In fact, everyone was surprised to see that Ranga was the same as he had been six months ago when he had first left the village.

When the crowd realised that Ranga was still the same, they dispersed but the narrator stayed back to talk to Rangappa. Ranga noticed him, came up to him and wished him respectfully. Ranga was a person who knew when it would be to his advantage to talk to someone and correctly measured people’s worth. He bent low to touch the narrator’s feet and the narrator blessed him saying, “May you get married soon.” After talking to Ranga for a few minutes, the narrator left.

The same afternoon, when the narrator was resting, Ranga came to his house with a couple of oranges. The narrator felt that he was a kind, thoughtful fellow and it would be good to have him marry and settle down. Soon, when he broached the topic of getting married, Ranga said he would not get married in the near future. He would wait and find the right girl. He quoted the example of an officer who got married six months back, when he was about thirty and his wife, twenty-five. He liked the idea of marrying a mature girl who would understand him, unlike a childish bride. Quoting the classic tale of Shakuntala, he said that Dushyantha would not have fallen in love with Shakuntala if she were young. He said that a man should marry a girl he admires and it would be impossible to admire an immature girl.

The narrator was concerned that the boy, who would make a good husband, had decided to remain a bachelor. But the narrator made up his mind to get him married.

Rama Rao’s niece, Ratna, had come to stay with him. She was from a big town, so she knew how to play the veena and the harmonium. She also had a sweet voice. Her parents had died, and her uncle had brought her home. The narrator felt that the girl would be a suitable bride for Ranga.

Since the narrator visited Rama Rao’s place often, Ratna was quite free with him. The very next morning he went to their house and told Rama Rao’s wife that he would send some buttermilk for them and she should ask Ratna to fetch it. Ratna came wearing a grand saree. The narrator told her to sit in his room and requested her to sing a song. He also sent for Ranga. While she was singing the song, Ranga reached the door. He was so enamoured by the voice that he stopped short at the doorstep as he did not want the singing to stop. But because he was curious . to see the singer, he peeped in. When Ratna saw the stranger, she immediately stopped. Ranga looked very disappointed when the singing stopped.

He asked the narrator why he had sent for him. The narrator noticed Ranga repeatedly glance at Ratna, as she stood at a distance with her head lowered. When Ranga realised the narrator had noticed him looking at her, he was self-conscious and expressed a desire to leave. But these were merely words as he did not make a move.

Ratna ran inside, overcome by shyness. Ranga asked who the girl was. But the narrator told him that it did not matter to either of them who she was as the writer was already married and Ranga had decided not to get married. When the narrator said that Ratna had got married a year back, Ranga was visibly disappointed. The next morning the narrator went to their Shastri or priest and astrologer and told him to keep everything ready to read the stars and also tutored him, what to say.

He met Ranga that afternoon; he was still looking lost in thought. He told Ranga to accompany him to see the Shastri to find out, astrologically, whether the stars were favourable for him or not. Ranga accompanied him. As planned, the Shastri pretended to make certain calculations and said that his problem had something to do with a girl. He added that the name of the girl was something found in the ocean such as Kamala (the lotus), Pachchi, (the moss) or Ratna (the precious stone). The narrator said that the girl in Rama Rao’s house was Ratna. He asked if there was any chance of their discussions bearing fruit. The Shastri was very positive and Ranga’s face revealed surprise and some happiness. The narrator said that the girl was married but there was a possibility of another suitable girl. Ranga’s face showed his disappointment.

The narrator and Ranga left the Shastri’s place. On their way, they crossed Rama Rao’s house. They saw Ratna standing at the door. The narrator went in alone and came out a minute later and announced that he was mistaken and that Ratna was not married. Quoting the Shastri’s prediction, the writer asked if his words were true. Ranga admitted that what the Shastri had said was absolutely true. Later that evening, the narrator joked with the Shastri about his predictions but Shastri did not like it.

Much later, one day Rangappa came to invite the narrator—Shyama for dinner. He said that it was his son, Shyama’s third birthday. The narrator was familiar with the English custom of naming the child after a person one liked. He asked Ranga, now that his wife was eight months pregnant, who was helping his mother to cook. Ranga said that his sister had come with her.

When the narrator went there for dinner, Shyama rushed to him and put his arms round his legs. The narrator kissed him and slipped a ring on his tiny little finger.

Ranga’s Marriage Summary Questions and Answers

Question 1.
What does the narrator feel he could call his narration instead of ‘Ranga’s Marriage’?
Answer:
The narrator feels that the title could have been something like ‘Ranganatha Vivaha’ or ‘Ranganatha Vijaya’ because it is about one of the local lads of the village—Rangappa— called Ranga. The word ‘marriage’ is reminiscent of the western influence on this country boy, who had gone to Bangalore to study.

Question 2.
What does the writer say about the Indians aping the West?
Answer:
The writer feels that Indians blindly follow the sahibs in England. Like a flock of sheep, they follow a single . one into the pit. He quotes the example of his village, Hosahalli, not finding a mention anywhere. He says when the English writers did not mention it, Indian geographers, too, did not ever refer to it.

Question 3.
Why were the people of the village curious to see Ranga?
Answer:
The people of the village were curious to see Ranga because not many villagers were learned in English back then when the story takes place. Ranga was the first one to go to Bangalore for his education and his homecoming was celebrated and people flocked to witness the change, ten years of Bangalore, wrought in him.

Question 4.
What example does the writer give in order to prove that English words have become a part of our everyday vocabulary?
Answer:
The narrator brings out how English became a part of everyday vocabulary through this example. When an old woman brought a bundle of firewood to Rama Rao’s house, her son told her he did not have any ‘change’, and promised to pay later. The poor woman did not understand the English word ‘change’ and went away, puzzled.

Question 5.
What about Ranga impressed the narrator in the first meeting?
Answer:
Ranga noticed the narrator when the crowd had melted away. He came to the narrator and did a namaskara respectfully, saying, “I am all right, with your blessings.” His namaskara was traditional and respectful, unlike the modem practice. He bent low to touch the narrator’s feet.

Question 6.
What kind of a bride was Ranga looking for? Why?
Answer:
Ranga wanted to marry a mature girl who would be able to talk lovingly. A very young girl was unlikely to understand him and could misconstrue his words, spoken in love. He cited the example of Dushayantha who had fallen in love with the mature Shakuntala. He felt, he could only marry a girl he admired.

Question 7.
Who was Ratna? Why was the narrator keen on getting her married to Ranga?
Answer:
Ratna was Rama Rao’s niece who had come to stay with him as her parents had died. She was from a big town, knew how to play the veena and the harmonium, and had a sweet voice. The writer considered her a . suitable match for Ranga.

Question 8.
How did the narrator arrange a meeting between Ratna and Ranga?
Answer:
The writer went to Rama Rao’s house and asked his wife to send Ratna to fetch the buttermilk that the narrator promised to send. When Ratna came, he told her to sit and requested her to sing a song. He then sent for Ranga. While she was singing, Ranga reached the door.

Question 9.
What was Ranga’s reaction? How did Ratna react to him?
Answer:
Ranga was taken in by the singing. He stopped at the threshold as he did not want the singing to stop, but was curious to see the singer. Carefully, he peeped in. The light coming into the room was blocked. Ratna looked up and seeing a stranger there suddenly stopped singing.

Question 10.
Explain: “The fellow said he would leave but did not make a move.”
Answer:
When Ratna stopped singing abruptly, Ranga said that it was his coming in that had stopped the singing. He expressed a desire to leave. He merely said it for the sake of saying, and he had no intention of going away. He was enamoured of the young girl.

We have decided to create the most comprehensive English Summary that will help students with learning and understanding.

The Address Summary in English by Marga Minco

The Address by Marga Minco About the Author

The Address Summary in English

The narrator, a young girl, knocked on a door and as a lady opened it; she introduced herself as Mrs S’s daughter. The lady showed no sign of recognition. On the contrary, she held the door in a way to make clear that the narrator was not welcome. For some time, she kept staring quietly at the narrator. So much so that the narrator felt that the woman was not the person she had been looking for. The narrator recalled having seen her, briefly, once, years ago. But the woman soon stepped away from the door and let her in. The narrator noticed her wearing the narrator’s mother’s green knitted cardigan. The lady saw her looking at the cardigan and hid herself partially behind the door. When the narrator asked her about her mother, she said that she had thought that none of the people who had left had come back.

The lady regretted her inability to do anything for her but the narrator insisted on talking to her as she had especially come all the way to meet her. However, the lady refused to talk to her and the narrator had no option but to leave.

The narrator stood on the doorstep and looked at the nameplate again. It read “Dorling” and a little inside was “Number 46”.

She walked back to the station, thinking about her mother who had given her that address, years ago when during the first half of the War she had gone home for a few days. She had, then, at once realised that various things were missing. Her mother had then told her about Mrs Dorling, an old contact of hers. She visited their place regularly and every time she went back, she took something home with her. These things included table silver, antique plates, large vases, and crockery. She used to tell the narrator’s mother that she wanted to save all her nice things if they had to leave.

The mother seemed to have nothing against her. However, the narrator was not convinced but on account of her mother’s disapproving looks, they didn’t discuss it again.

The narrator, walking through familiar places for the first time since the War, reached the station. The sights evoked memories from a dear time.

She recalled her first meeting with Mrs Dorling. It was just the day after her mother had talked about her. Her mother had introduced her. She had noticed the woman walk out with the heavy case. Her mother informed her that she lived in Marconi Street—Number 46. She had asked her to remember that.

Now, the narrator had come after a long time. At first, after the War, she had not been interested in and was also afraid of going back. She was scared of facing the things that had belonged to her mother and that would remind her of a past that was no longer there. These things would just evoke painful memories.

But slowly and steadily, everything became more normal again and like the rest, the narrator had adjusted to her new life. Strangely, later she became curious whether all the belongings that they had left behind, would still be at that address. She felt the urge to see them, touch them and recall the memories associated with them.

After her first futile visit to Mrs Dorling’s house, she decided to try a second time. This time, a girl of about fifteen opened the door and let her in. Her mother was not at home. The narrator followed the girl along the passage. She noticed an old-fashioned iron Hanukkah candle-holder that the narrator’s family had never used as it was much more bulky than a single candlestick.

The girl led her to the living room. The narrator was dismayed. The room had things that she had wanted to see again but which now seemed to have a strange, stressful effect. She could not place what the exact reason was—it could be because of the inelegant way everything was arranged, or because of the ugly furniture or the humid smell in the room. She noticed the woollen tablecloth on which, she recalled, the burn mark that had never been repaired.

The girl put cups on the tea table and poured tea from a white pot with a gold border on the lid. Then, the girl opened a box and took some spoons out. The familiarity of all these things clouded the narrator’s mind. These emotions were different than any other that she had known.

The narrator complimented the young girl on the ‘nice’ box. She laughed and said that her mother had told her that it was an antique. She said that they had lots of antiques. She pointed round the room. The narrator noticed various things that brought back memories of the past. She remembered that as a child she had always liked the apple on the pewter plate. The young girl told the narrator that at one time, they even ate in the plates hanging on the wall. The narrator, by then, found the bum mark on the tablecloth. The girl looked curiously at the narrator.

The narrator said that one gets so used to touching such lovely things in the house that one really notices it when they are missing, that which needed repairing or must have been lent. She continued how her mother had once asked her to polish the silver—the spoons, forks and knives. Before that she had not even realised that the cutlery they used for eating, every day, was made of silver.

The girl walked to the sideboard to open a drawer and show the narrator what they ate with, but by then it was time for her to catch her train. As she walked out, she heard the jingling of spoons and forks.

Having walked out, she wanted to wipe out her past. She realised that the objects that are associated in one’s memory with the familiar life of earlier times, lose their value, at once, when one is cut off from them. She did not need them in her small rented room where the scraps of paper that they used as blackout paper still hung along the windows and no more than a handful of cutlery could fit in the narrow table drawer. She decided to forget the past.

The Address Summary Questions and Answers

Question 1.
Where had the narrator come? Why was she back?
Answer:
The narrator is a Dutch Jew, who had to leave Holland during the Second World War. She had left along with her mother for safety. Now she was back to where her past ‘things’ lay. She wanted to see and touch her belongings in order to relive those memories.

Question 2.
Whom did the narrator desire to meet in Holland? Why?
Answer:
The narrator was told by her mother to remember ‘Number 46 Marconi Street’, where Mrs Dorling lived; she had insisted on keeping their things safely till the war was over. After the war, the narrator was curious about their possessions that were still at that address and she went to meet Mrs Dorling.

Question 3.
What kind of a welcome did the narrator get from Mrs Dorling?
Answer:
Mrs Dorling was cold and indifferent and evidently displeased to see the author. In fact, she tried to prevent her from entering by blocking her entrance. Later, she said it was not convenient for her to talk to the narrator at that point of time and refused to meet her.

Question 4.
When did the narrator first learn about the existence of Mrs Dorling?
Answer:
The narrator recalled the time when she was home during the first half of the War. She had noticed that various things were missing. Her mother then told her about Mrs Dorling, an old acquaintance who renewed their contact, and came regularly, each time, carrying away some of their things.

Question 5.
What was the narrator’s mother’s opinion about Mrs Dorling?
Answer:
The narrator’s mother considered Mrs Dorling a very benevolent lady, who strived to ‘save’ their ‘nice things’ by carrying some of them away, each time she visited. The narrator’s mother was unable to see through the lady who wished to cheat her out of her valuables, instead she felt grateful to Mrs Dorling.

Question 6.
What did the narrator recall about her first meeting with Mrs Dorling?
Answer:
The narrator saw Mrs Dorling for the first time on the morning after the day she came to know about her. Coming downstairs, the narrator saw her mother about to see someone out. It was a woman, dressed in a brown coat and a shapeless hat, with a broad back; she nodded and picked up the suitcase.

Question 7.
Why did the narrator return to Marconi Street after a long time?
Answer:
The narrator returned to Marconi Street after a long time because in the beginning, after the Liberation, she was not interested in all that stored stuff. She had lost her mother and was also afraid of being confronted with things that remained as a painful reminder to their past.

Question 8.
How did the narrator decide to go back to the ‘things’?
Answer:
Gradually, when everything became normal again—the bread was of a lighter colour and she had a bed to sleep in, securely, and the surroundings became familiar again—the narrator was curious about all the possessions that must still be at that address that her mother had talked about and went there to relive her memories.

Question 9.
Explain: “I stopped, horrified. I was in a room I knew and did not know.”
Answer:
When the narrator went to Mrs Dorling’s house the second time, a girl of about fifteen let her in. She saw familiar things but arranged differently that lent unfamiliarity to the surroundings. She found herself surrounded by things that she had wanted to see again but which really oppressed her in that strange atmosphere.

Question 10.
Why did the narrator not want to remember the place?
Answer:
The narrator had primarily returned for the sake of memories that were linked to the things that had once belonged to her mother. However, she realized, the objects linked in her memory with the familiar life that she had once lived lost their value as they had been removed and put in strange surroundings.

We have decided to create the most comprehensive English Summary that will help students with learning and understanding.

The Summer of The Beautiful White Horse Summary in English by William Saroyan

The Summer of The Beautiful White Horse by William Saroyan About the Author

The Summer of The Beautiful White Horse Summary in English

The narrator, Aram, remembers an incident which took place one summer when he was nine years old. He was asleep in his room at four in the morning, when he heard a tap on the window. He jumped out of bed and looked out of the window. There was his cousin, Mourad, sitting on a beautiful white horse. Mourad invited the narrator for a ride.

Those were the days when the world looked wonderful and life was like an enjoyable and unexplained dream. Aram also knew that Mourad enjoyed every minute of his life but this was even beyond his expectations. Since his earliest memories, he had had a strong desire to ride. But their tribe, Garoghlanian, was so poor that none of them understood where they even got money for food. Most importantly, they had been famous for their honesty for about eleven centuries, even when, as believed, they were the wealthiest family in the world. They were known to be proud, honest and an ethical clan and were incapable of taking advantage of anyone, leave alone stealing.

Aram could not believe that the horse had anything to do with his cousin Mourad or for that matter with any of the other members of their family. Mourad could have not bought the horse and so must have stolen it. Hence, he felt both delighted and frightened. He asked Mourad where he had stolen the horse from. Mourad did not deny that he had stolen it but asked Aram to jump out of the window, for a ride.

In his childlike innocence and simplicity, Aram made himself believe that stealing a horse for a ride was not the same thing as stealing money. Even if it was, it would not be as serious as stealing if one was so passionately fond of horses, the way Mourad and he were. It could be called stealing only if they sold the horse.

Aram changed his clothes, jumped out of the window, leaped onto the horse behind Mourad. Then, they lived at the edge of town, on Walnut Avenue. Behind their house were vineyards, orchards, irrigation ditches and country roads. They rode to the Olive Avenue. They were happy with themselves; the fresh air seemed new and lovely to breathe. They were so happy that Mourad began to sing. Aram felt that there was a crazy element in the tribe. Each family had a passionate streak in them and in their family Mourad was the one who was supposed to carry the wild trait.

Before Mourad, it was Uncle Khosrove who was supposed to be crazy. He was so ill-tempered and impatient that he stopped anyone from talking by roaring. Once his son Arak went running to him at the barber’s shop, where his father was having his moustache trimmed, to tell him their house was on fire. Khosrove sat up in the chair and roared. The barber repeated what the boy had said and Khosrove roared at him, too, to stop as it was “no harm”.

Mourad was considered the natural descendant of this man, although Mourad’s father, Zorab, was a practical man. In their tribe, traits were not necessarily inherited from parents. The tribe, from the beginning, had been impulsive.

Aram and Mourad let the horse run for as long as it felt like running. Then, Mourad wanted to ride alone. Mourad kicked his heels into the horse and shouted, “Vazire, run”. The horse stood on its hind legs and then ran. It was one of the loveliest sights. After five minutes of running across a field of dry grass to the irrigation ditch, they returned. I was then Aram’s turn to ride. The horse, instead of running to the irrigation ditch, ran down the road to the vineyard of Dikran Halabian where it began to leap over vines. It leapt over seven vines and then Aram fell off. The horse continued running. Mourad went after the horse and it took him half an hour to find the horse and bring him back.

By then it was broad daylight and people were awake. However, Mourad did not seem worried about hiding the horse. Aram soon realised that Mourad had been taking these early morning rides for some time and had got him for a ride today as he knew how much Aram wanted to ride. Mourad told Aram that if people found out about the horse he was supposed to say that they had started riding that morning.

Mourad walked the horse to the bam of a deserted vineyard that once belonged to a farmer named Fetvajian. It was difficult to make the horse behave well. But Mourad said that he had an understanding with the horse and got him under control. Aram went home and ate a filling breakfast. In the afternoon, his uncle Khosrove came to their house for coffee and cigarettes. He sat in the parlour, talking, when another visitor, a farmer, arrived. His name was John Byro. He was sad and mentioned that his white horse had been stolen a month ago and was still untraced. Uncle Khosrove became very annoyed and shouted that when they had all lost their homeland, crying over a horse was pointless. John Byro protested that his carriage was no good without a horse and that he had walked for ten miles to get there. But Uncle Khosrove roared yet again saying that he had legs.

The farmer said that there was a pain in his lefjt leg and Uncle Khosrove shouted that he should not pay attention to it. He did not seem to care that the horse had cost John Byro sixty dollars as he said that he did not value money. When Uncle Khosrove went away, Aram’s mother tried to explain to John Byro that Uncle Khosrove had “a gentle heart” but was simply homesick. After the farmer went away, Aram ran to Mourad’s house. Mourad was sitting under a peach tree and nursing the. hurt wing of a young robin, which could not fly. Aram told him of John Byro’s visit. He requested Mourad not to give the horse back until he had leamt to ride. Mourad said that it would take him a year to learn riding. They could certainly not keep the horse for a year as that would amount to stealing and a member of the Garoghlanian family could never steal. He would not keep the horse for more than six months and then it “must go back to its true owner”.

For two weeks, early every morning, Mourad and the narrator took the horse out of the bam of the deserted vineyard where they had hidden it and rode it. Aram was thrown off every time but he did not lose hope and hoped to ride the way Mourad did.

One morning on their way to Fetvajian’s bam they met the farmer John Byro. Mourad wished him as John Byro observed the horse keenly. He asked the boys the name of the horse. Mourad said that in Armenian its name was “My Heart”. John Byro wanted to look into the horse’s mouth as it looked so much like the one he had that was stolen. After looking into the mouth of the horse the farmer said that he could have sworn that it was his horse if he didn’t know their family was famed for their honesty. He was not a mistrustful man so he would believe his heart rather than his eyes. Saying which, he walked away.

The next day, early morning, they took the horse to John Byro’s vineyard and put it in the bam. The dogs followed them around without making a sound. Mourad put his arms around the horse, pressed his nose into the horse’s nose, patted it, and then they came away. That afternoon, John Byro went to Aram’s house in his carriage and showed his mother the horse that had been stolen and returned. He said that that he was confused as the horse was stronger and even better tempered. Uncle Khosrove heard this, became irritated and shouted at him to be quiet as his horse had been returned.

The Summer of The Beautiful White Horse Summary Questions and Answers

Question 1.
What does the writer suggest by beginning the story with the following words, “One day back there in the good old days…”?
Answer:
The beginning of the story is suggestive of the fact that the episode that is going to be narrated is not one from the recent past. On the contrary, it is something that happened years back. The words ‘good old days’, suggest that the times in the past were better than what they are at present.

Question 2.
What does the writer say about the ‘good old days’?
Answer:
The ‘good old days’ refer to a time when the narrator was about nine years old. Then, to him, the world was full of all possible kinds of splendour. Life then seemed charming and was as alluring as a mystifying dream.

Question 3.
What was the narrator’s first reaction to the horse?
Answer:
When the narrator’s cousin, Mourad, came to his house at four in the morning and woke him up, Aram couldn’t believe what he saw. Mourad was riding a beautiful white horse. He stuck his head out of the window and rubbed his eyes to make sure that he wasn’t dreaming.

Question 4.
What did the narrator think of Mourad?
Answer:
Unlike the rest of the world, it was only Aram who did not feel that Mourad was ‘crazy’. Aram knew that Mourad enjoyed being alive more than anybody else, and ‘who had ever fallen into the world by mistake’.

Question 5.
What were the chief traits of the members of his family that the narrator could recall?
Answer:
The narrator felt that although the people of his clan were poverty stricken, yet they were honest. They were proud, honest, and they believed in right and wrong. None of them would take advantage of anybody in the world, let alone steal.

Question 6.
Why was the narrator both delighted and frightened at the same time?
Answer:
The narrator was delighted at the magnificence of the horse. He could smell it, hear it breathing, which excited him but what frightened him was that Mourad could not have bought the horse. The narrator realized, if he had not bought it, he must have stolen it.

Question 7.
How did the narrator establish that Mourad had stolen the horse?
Answer:
When the initial fascination and surprise wore out, Aram asked Mourad where he had stolen the horse from. Aram was certain that no one in their family could afford one. When Mourad did not deny having stolen the horse, and evaded that question, Aram was sure that he had stolen the horse.

Question 8.
How did Aram justify the act of stealing the horse?
Answer:
Aram felt that stealing a horse for a ride was not the same thing as stealing something else, such as money. Perhaps, it was not stealing at all because they were crazy about horses. He felt it would not be called stealing until they offered to sell the horse, which they would never do.

Question 9.
What did Aram feel about Mourad’s temperament?
Answer:
According to Aram, Mourad had a crazy streak. That made him the natural descendant of Uncle Khosrove who had a crazy element in him. This crazy streak was common in their tribe and need not be passed on from a father to the son. The people of the tribe had been, from the beginning, unpredictable and unrestrained.

Question 10.
What happened when Aram tried to ride the horse?
Answer:
When Aram kicked into the muscles of the horse, it reared and snorted. Then it began to run. It ran down the . road to the vineyard of Dikran Halabian where it began to leap over vines. The horse leaped over seven vines and Aram fell off but the horse continued running.

We have decided to create the most comprehensive English Summary that will help students with learning and understanding.

Father To Son Poem Summary in English by Elizabeth Jennings

Father To Son Poem by Elizabeth Jennings About the Poet

Father To Son Poem Summary in English

This poem is a lament of the father because the chasm between his son and him has widened over the years.

The father feels that he does not understand his son although they have lived under the same roof for years. He regrets that the son seems to have become a stranger to him. The father wants to start afresh; recall moments when the son was a child. He feels that essentially, a part of the relationship between the two has been destroyed by the father.

The love the father showered upon his son fell on barren ground, i.e., it was unreciprocated. They talk to each other like strangers and there is no sign of any agreement between them. The father tried to fashion the child into a likeness of him. But they have grown apart. The father finds it impossible to share his son’s likes and dislikes.

There is total lack of communication between them. The father would want his son to return to him like the prodigal son. He would value them coming closer rather than the son moving away. The father feels he would forgive his son. Out of their grief, a new love would blossom.

As father and son, they ought to share the same world but unfortunately they cannot understand each other. The father is grieved and it is his sorrow that at times takes the form of anger. Both of them try to reach out to each other but in vain. The gulf is too wide.

Father To Son Poem Summary Questions and Answers

1. I do not understand this child
Though we have lived together now
In the same house for years.
I know Nothing of him, so try to build
Up a relationship from how
He was when small. Yet have I killed

a. Who is the ‘I’ in these lines? Who is the ‘child’?
Answer:
The father is referred to as the ‘I’ in these lines. His son is the ‘child’.

b. What is his complaint?
Answer:
His complaint is that he does not understand his son despite their living together.

c. What does he want to do now?
Answer:
He now wants to build a relationship from the beginning.

d. What has he ‘killed’?
Answer:
He has killed the connection or rapport between him and his son.

2. The seed I spent or sown it where
The land is his and none of mine?
We speak like strangers, there’s no sign
Of understanding in the air.
This child is built to my design
Yet what he loves I cannot share.

a. What has he ‘sown’?
Answer:
He had nurtured the child which he compares to seeds, on love and understanding.

b. What is the relationship between them like?
Answer:
The father and son are like strangers.

c. What is lacking between the two?
Answer:
Sharing and understanding is lacking between the two.

d. What can he not share?
Answer:
The father cannot share his son’s opinion, and his likes and dislikes.

3. Silence surrounds us. I would have
Him prodigal, returning to
His father’s house, the home he knew,
Rather than see him make and move
His world. I would forgive him too,
Shaping from sorrow a new love.

a. Explain: “Silence surrounds us”.
Answer:
There is no communication between the father and the son.

b. Explain:- “I would have Him prodigal, returning to His father’s house.”
Answer:
In the Bible, when the recklessly extravagant son returned, the father forgave him his earlier sins as his coming home showed his regret. Similarly, the father is prepared to forgive his son if he comes back to him.

c. Name the poetic device used in the line: “I would have Him prodigal, returning to His father’s house.”
Answer:
Allusion. The prodigal son alludes to the parable of Cain and Abel from the Bible.

d. What would the father not want the son to do?
Answer:
The father would not want the son to move away into his own world.

e. What would the father do if the son came back to him?
Answer:
The father would forgive his son and from their sorrow love would arise again.

4. Father and son, we both must live
On the same globe and the same land,
He speaks: I cannot understand
Myself, why anger grows from grief
We each put out an empty hand,
Longing for something to forgive.

a. How do they live?
Answer:
They live in the same place, yet they are very distant.

b. What emotions does the father feel?
Answer
The father is aggrieved and angry at the son distancing himself.

c. Explain: “We each put out an empty hand”.
Answer:
The father and son try to reach out to each other but in vain.

d. What do they long for?
Answer:
They long to forgive and forget the past and start afresh.