Father to Son

by Elizabeth Jennings

About Elizabeth Jennings

Elizabeth Jennings was born in Boston, Lincolnshire. Died in 2001, Jennings, having
completed her graduation from Oxford University, first worked as an Assistant Librarian at
Oxford City Library and then as a reader for the London Publisher Chatto & Windus and
finally she became a full-time writer for the rest of her life.
She started her poetry writing career at the very early stage after having being encouraged
by one of her schoolteachers as well as by an uncle, who himself was a poet. She wrote
her earlier poetries on being inspired by Coleridge’s “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”, G.
K. Chesterton’s “Battle of Lepanto”, and then the odes of Keats.
Afterward, Jennings was greatly influenced by the poetries of Edwin Muir and Robert
Frost. In most of Jennings’s poems, there have been strong logic, emotional sensitivity, an
avoidance of decoration, an absence of vagueness and an eschewing of any mystification.
She had always taken care of the use of rhyme and meter when it comes to the form of
poetry. Her use of words and sentence structure in the poem are very easy to understand.
All her poems were simple and without literary decoration and pretentiousness in
literature.

Introduction
Let’s face it; generation gap is a two-sided fact instead of one. It is a fact that every
generation has to go through. Whether you are elder to your sister or younger to your
brother, the clash of generation gap continues. However, in this poem, Father to Son, the
poet has portrayed the generation gap between a father and his son. The poem basically
brings forth a father’s illusions towards his son. The father is seen as a helpless human
being who, since his son’s childhood, has been able to understand his son’s emotional
growth.
While the father finds fault in his own son, it is the father who is actually blamed. Where
the father shows his incapability to understand his son, he, at the same time, reveals
several unknown facts about his son. This makes the situation of lack-of-understanding
more ironical. And the very irony puts questions to the father’s integrity and ingenuity.

Analysis
I do not understand this child
(…)
1
He was when small.
In this first stanza of the poem, Father to Son by Elizabeth Jennings, the poet shows father
saying that he has not succeeded in understanding his son because, he himself could not
grow up with his son. This might be because when the son was growing differently, the
father might have been busy in his chores, and would have kept himself aloof from the
changes taking place in the outer world.
The narrow-mindedness of the father might have stopped him to understand the changes
his son would have been experiencing. But now, the father, having failed to comprehend
the height of his son’s emotional growth, is making attempt to understand him as a child
instead of trying to know the changed world wherein his son is growing up.
However, the type of relationship the father now wants to develop with his son will do
more harms than any good for the father will always think that his son is still a little child
and is so far not in such a condition when he is able to understand his actual person.

Yet have I killed

(…)
Of understanding in the air.
Let’s face it; every father wants to design his child as per his own wish and desire, but it
goes astray, and becomes what he wants to. Similarly, in this second, the father thinks that
when he grew the seed of his son, he expected him to grow and take branches under his
shade but now when he has fully grown up it seems that all his expectations from his son
are in vain.
Whatever attempts he made, and whatever pains and protections he took and gave his
son while he was growing are now in vain because, he now wants to design his life
according to his own ways, and does not expect his father to do any kind of interference
in his life. This is really a very pathetic situation for gardener-like-father, who made all
possible attempts to help his child grow under his shade, but he now feels to be left
behind because of the generation gap that has come about with the changing world.
The poet says that the father and son now behave like strangers in their own house, and it
is hardly possible that they would ever be able to understand each other. The land that
once used to belong to the father is now all for the son, who wants to walk, talk and live in
his own way. There is almost nil sign of understanding between both of them.

This child is built to my design

Yet what he loves I cannot share.
Silence surrounds us.
2
In this stanza, the poet shows the self-centeredness of the father, who though wishes to
design his son’s life according to his own, when it comes sharing what his son likes and
feels pleasure in, he avoid revealing it. Where he once used to think that his son would not
be able to design his life, but it is time to talk about his son’s preferences he feels ashamed
of revealing them.
Here, “what he loves” may mean to the things, trends and people that his son loves, and
when he says: “I cannot share” it may mean a lot. Yes, it could either be the bad things or
good things of his child or the self-centredness of the father who has now developed a
kind of anger or hatred towards what his son likes.
I am really amazed to read this stanza and when I compare it with the previous stanzas, it
makes me think about the father what he was thinking earlier and what he is now doing
when it comes to speaking good things about his son. This stanza also surprises me when
“Silence surrounds us”.
How could you avoid talking about the seed that you planted with much care and
cautiousness? Reading through this stanza, it can be realised that all concerns and worries
that the father was showing was nothing but affectation of love towards his son.

I would have
(…)
Shaping from sorrow a new love.
This stanza presents the very different character of the father. Here, the father is shown in
very callous form, which is not expected from any father on this earth. I am really
surprised to see what the father was in the first and second stanza, and how he has
become in this stanza. Let’s face it; no father in his senses would ever wish his son to go
away from him and destroy his life.
Why would a father want his so to get lost and struggle for life? But this is the father who
wishes so. He wishes that his son should go away from him and return like the prodigal
son in the Bible. This sort of callousness of the father towards his son shows that he never
loved his son. However, if we take this stanza in other way round, it will come to our
knowledge that the father wishes his son to live and struggle so that his child can learn
about the bitterness of his life, and become matured after having encountered the ups
and downs of life.
He wants his son to return like a matured man full of experiences. This wish of the father
may also be because of the tenderness and innocence that his child is going through.
Anyway, whatever be the reason, the father wishes so he must stand by his child through

3
thick and thin and help him know about the life though most of the things are known by
the human beings itself. But if you can share your experience with your child, it not only
helps him go ahead in his/her life, but also let me take a wise decision when it comes to
any hardship in life. However, we must know that to err is human.

Father and son, we both must live

(…)
Longing for something to forgive.
In this last stanza of the poem, the poet doesn’t present what is expected from it. It does
talk about the reconciliation, but doesn’t give any permanent solution. The father is shown
and left lamenting and complaining, but doesn’t want to provide any solution.
Similarly the son is shown to be ready to reconcile and live again as they used to live
earlier. But this does not end the problem of generation gap that remains between the
father and son. Therefore, as a sign of reconciliation, each of them welcomes one another
to live friendly.
Some readers may deject and resent on this reconciliation solution, but according to me,
there is hardly any solution to the generation gap. There has always been generation gap,
and it will be so for future generation. The only thing we can do is to understand the
feelings of each other and line of respect must not be crossed and forgotten.

Literary Devices
Simile – a figure of speech that makes comparison and shows similarities between two
things
"We speak like strangers"
Alliteration - The occurrence of the same letter or sound at the beginning of closely
connected words
The seed I spent or sown it where - ‘s’ sound
"Silence surrounds us"
Metaphor - an indirect comparsion between a quality shared by two persons or things
"The seed I spent or sown it where
The land is his and none of mine?"
"I would have
Him prodigal, returning to
His father’s house"

Introductory Question and Answers

4
1. Does the poem talk of an exclusively personal experience or is it fairly universal?
Ans: The poem ‘Father to Son’ talks about a fairly universal experience. When a child is
growing up, the father is usually busy with his work and is not able to take out time for his
child. When the father grows older and has free time, his son gets involved in his life and
has no time for his old father. This cycle is universal.
2. How is the father’s helplessness brought out in the poem?
Ans: The father’s helplessness is brought out in the poem by these lines: ‘I do not
understand this child, Though we have lived together now, In the same house for years.’
‘He speaks: I cannot understand Myself, why anger grows from grief.’ ‘Yet what he loves I
cannot share’ and ‘I know Nothing of him’.
These lines indicate how he wanted to make a relationship with his son better and now as
his son was like a stranger to him, they both put out an empty hand to each other and
remain in vain.
3. Identify the phrases and lines that indicate distance between father and son.
Ans: The phrases and lines that indicate the distance between both of them are: ‘I do not
understand this child, Though we have lived together now, In the same house for years.’
‘He speaks: I cannot understand Myself, why anger grows from grief.’ ‘Yet what he loves I
cannot share’ ‘I know Nothing of him’ and ‘Silence surrounds us’.

Important Extracts
1. Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow:
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.
Q1. Who have lived in the same house? How long?
Ans. The father and the son have lived in the same house for years.
Q2. Why does the father say that he knows nothing of him?
Ans. They live like strangers in the same house. Complete silence surrounds them when
they are each other’s presence. That’s why he says that he knows nothing of his son.
Q3. What kind of relationship does he want to build up?
Ans. He wants to build up the same kind of relationship as he used to have when his son
was a little child.

5
2. Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow:
Yet have I killed
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.
Q1. What does the word ‘seed’ signify?
Ans. The word ‘seed’ here refers to all the hard work the father had to do to bring up the
child.
Q2. What ‘land’ does the speaker speak of?
Ans. The child’s mind is the land into which the father had tried to sow the seeds of his
thoughts.
Q3. Why do they speak like strangers?
Ans. They speak like strangers because they have different ways of life and thoughts.

Q3. Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow:
This child is built to my design
Yet what he loves I cannot share.
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.
Q1. What kind of child had he desired to design?
Ans. He had desired to design a child who shared his likes and dislikes.
Q2. Why does the speaker say ‘this child’ not ‘my child’?
Ans. Because the child has nothing common with him.
Q3. Explain: ‘Silence surrounds us’.
Ans. There is no communication at all between the father and the son. There is complete
silence when they are each other’s presence.
Q4. What does the father want his son to do?
Ans. He wants his son to come back to his father’s home.
Q5. What is the father prepared to accept?
Ans. He is prepared to accept his so with all his profligacy.
6
Q6. What does the father not want his son to do?
Ans. The father doesn’t want his son to make a new world of his own and move into it.
Q7. What would the father do to shape a new love from sorrow?
Ans. He would forgive his son for whatever sorrow he has given him.

Q4. Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow:
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,
Q1. How does the poet feel when his relationship with his son comes under strain?
Ans. The poet is keen to save the blood ties with his son. He wants the son to return to his
old house.
Q2. What could be the cause for their distancing from each other?
Ans. The cause of the growing gap between the dad and his son is lack of understanding.
Both need each other, yet they turn apart because of ego-problem.
Q3. What do both father and son long for?
Ans. They long for an excuse to forgive each other.
Q4. What do the words ‘an empty hand’ signify?
Ans. The words ‘an empty hand’ signify that neither father nor the son has gained
anything from their state of estrangement. Both of them are empty handed.
Q5. What can’t the father understand?
Ans. The father can’t understand why he becomes angry in his grief.
Q6. Does the poem have a consistent rhyme scheme?
Ans. Yes, the rhyme scheme in each stanza is abbaba.
Short Answer Type Questions

Q1. Why is the father unhappy with his son?

Ans. The father is unhappy with his son as there is no interaction between the two. They
don’t understand each other and are like strangers. Though they live under the same roof,
yet they have nothing common between them. Their thinking and outlook are totally
different. So they remain separated from each other. So, the father is deeply troubled.
Q2. What does the father long for?

7
Ans. The father is much more tense and upset. He fails to see where he made a mistake.
He wants to make peace with his son and keep him in the same house. He is willing to
forget and forgive the boy. He is only waiting for an excuse.
Q3. Can you suggest a solution to the widening gap between father and son?
Ans. The tussle between the aged and the youth is very old and universal. Elders see young
ones as their property and try to impose their will on them. As a result the son revolts. The
father must try to understand and respect the demands of the son. Not rod but the
language of love can bridge the gap and avert the clash.
Q4. Who do you sympathize with—the father or the son?
Ans. Being a youngster, I also often revolt against the authoritarian attitude of elders. They
have ego problem. They demand total obedience from young ones. I know that the
relationship between father and son is strong yet delicate as well. I would humbly advise
grown-ups to be a bit more flexible and liberal in their attitude. In bending, they both will
win.
Q5. How is the father’s helplessness brought out in the poem?
Ans. The father is not only sad but also angry. But he feels helpless. He is ready to patch up
with the son, forgive him and bring him back home at any cost. He wonders why they have
now become strangers. He is ready to overlook his son’s wasteful habits. He is extending
his empty hand to get an excuse to welcome the boy into his old home. But the son looks
adamant. Ego problem persists.
Q6. Why is the father unable to understand his son in Father to Son”?
Ans. The father is unable to understand his son due to generation gap. It is a psychological
and emotional gap between parents or elder people and the young ones. This creates
misunderstanding and lack of attachment between the parents and children. The success
lies in how effectively the parents can avoid the generation gap or ignore difference with
their children.
Q7. ‘I would have him prodigal’. What does the father mean by this?
Ans. Prodigal means wastefully extravagant. In the Bible there is a story, where a father
inherits property and gives it to his sons. The younger son wastes a lot but returns to his
father’s home. His father forgives him and takes him back home. Here in the poem the
father is ready to accept his prodigal son and he may start living with him under the same
roof.
Q8. What does the poet mean by `silence surrounds us?
Ans. The father is troubled because there is no interaction between them. Though they
have been living under the same roof for years but they do not understand each other and
8
live like strangers. Their outlook and temperament are different. They have a
communication gap along with the generation gap. So both are unhappy and want to
come closer but they can’t help it.

Long Answer Type Questions

Q1. Why in your view has a sense of distance arrived in the modern youth?
Ans. The present era has lost all its ancient moral, ethical, social and cultural values. The
deep sense of joint family system is diminishing to a large extent. The newly married
couple wants to lead a life to its own freedom duly away from the parents. They think that
the joint family or parents living with them will put a restraint on their freedom.
They fail to understand the real worth of their parents and long to have a deeper distance
from them. The media and the western civilization have surrounded their ideology. They
do not care for the civility in any sense. Thus the distance is taking its deep root among the
youths. They do not realize their duties for the old aged parents rather they consider it an
extra burden upon them. Thus a sense of distance has become in vogue among the
modern youths.
Q2. The poem reflects the realities of the modern times. The aged persons face problems
and there is no end to it. How do you feel?
Ans. The breaking-up of the joint family system and the change in our value system have
created serious problems for the aged persons. They are denied physical, moral, financial
and emotional support because their children are grossly involved in their own affairs. A
feeling that they are unwanted persons has gripped the aged. The attitude towards the
aged is marked by hatred, disregard, apathy and insults. This drowns them in the
fathomless chasm of depression. Above all, elderly persons having no source of income
are the worst sufferers. Growing materialism is the main culprit. Blood is no longer thicker
than water. An elderly person who stands between the heirs and his wealth becomes a
thorn in their flesh. Many start torturing the aged to death.
The aged persons require nothing but love, affection and respect. So the children must
change their attitude. They must not neglect the very source of their existence. Accept the
aged happily and see the blessings of God showering in rapid succession.
****************************************
The Tale of Melon City
By: Vikram Seth

Analysis
9
Introduction and Background (Stanzas 1-4)
The structure of The Tale of Melon City, which you can read in full here, is well-designed to
match the intended tone of the story. Each verse is set up as a couplet, with each line
being eight syllables long and rhyming with the previous line. At face value, the rhythm of
the story is easy enough to follow; there is a king who is described as being calm and just,
who wants to build an archway over the major road into the city so that those who see it
will be impressed and bettered for having seen the archway. The way these facts are
presented at face value gives the story its first tinge of an unusual tone — one question a
reader might raise immediately might have to do with wondering what exactly is so
impressive about an archway over the road. Archways are splendid structures, but “edify”
is simply too strong a word to describe what happens when a person looks at an arch.
Fortunately, it becomes clear quickly that this is Vikram Seth’s intention.
The next point of interest appears in the fourth couplet, where Seth mentions, very
specifically, that the workmen are building the arch because their king told them to. There
is no mention of salary or compensation in any form — the workers are simply following
the directives of their monarch. The eight syllables in this particular couplet also stand out,
because it contains the first line in The Tale of Melon City for which each word is exactly
one syllable long, which means it uses eight words to say a very simple thing: “they
obeyed the King.” It sounds strange when read aloud, and aids to the mild air of
ridiculousness that The Tale of Melon City is rapidly picking up.

An Unusual Crime (Stanzas 5-8)

The story continues, and sees the King attempting to impress and inspire his subjects by
riding through the archway, adding the impressiveness of the monarchy to its already
apparently inspiring construction. Impressiveness and edification aren’t quite what the
King gets, however, as the centre of the arch is not high enough that his crown, placed
upon his head as he rides, isn’t knocked off of his head. Once again, the verses point out to
the reader that the King is a placid individual, right before he decides that the logical thing
to do is to execute the chief builder in charge of the project. This is a clear oxymoron, and
a fairly absurd scenario — execution for a building mishap? It has already been pointed
out, however, that the workers of this world are interested in the directives of the
monarch above other pursuits, so the execution is arranged anyway.
In the sixth couplet, the unusual structure of The Tale of Melon City manifests itself in the
form of a sentence that ends mid-line and picks up exactly there: “The arch was build too
low. A frown / Appeared upon his placid face.” The structure of the verses means that the

10
couplet lines always end on the eighth syllable, which has to rhyme with the sound from
eight syllables ago. Up until this point, each line has ended either with a period, or with no
punctuation at all, so each line has had exactly the same length naturally. That is not the
case here, where the reader has to essentially ignore the period to keep the flow of The
Tale of Melon City, which forcefully increases its pace. It seems like a fairly minor point to
focus on, but forcing this pace is in fact a very clever way for Seth to maintain the
whimsical nature of the work, even as the story itself takes a rather ridiculous turn
anyway.

Assigning Guilt (Stanzas 9-18)

Across the next ten verses, the reader gets a better sense of exactly how this just and
placid ruler makes the decisions that govern his world. When he summons the chief
builder to be hanged, the builder points out that it was actually the workmen who
constructed the arch, while he was merely their overseer; if it’s anyone’s fault, he argues,
it’s the fault of the people who physically formed the arch to curve too low. Immediately,
the King stops the execution and realizes that what he actually needs to do is to execute
each of the workers who had a direct hand in the incorrectly-sized structure. The workers,
of course, don’t want to be killed either, so they suggest that were the bricks they were
using the correct size, the arch would have been perfect. It isn’t difficult to guess what the
King does next.
The blame game continues, passing from the stonemasons to the architect before the
architect points out that the King himself had a hand in adjusting the plans for the
structure, which has some fairly unpleasant implications for this man who seems to just
hang whomever he is told to.
If we strip away the absurd nature of this particular scenario, we have a ruler who has
decreed that a crime has been committed, and the most reasonable punishment for the
criminal is execution. What is happening here is essentially a trial, where a justice of the
law is hearing testimonies from suspects and attempting to assign guilt accordingly. The
question Vikram Seth seems to be posing, then, has to do with the nature of justice and
the proper assignment of blame. After all, the chief builder led the project, and his
workers physically committed the crime, using tools they bought from a stonemason and
the designs they purchased from an architect. Everyone contributed somewhat to the
crime, but everyone can claim that their own contributions are tiny, and that someone
else should take the blame. So what does the King do? Hang everyone? Hang no one?

11
Assign a lesser punishment? Beneath the ridiculous story is a thematic question that Seth
subtly proposes to his readers.

“Wisdom” (Stanzas 19-25)

The King here is described as being placid and just, but is portrayed as being a fairly
inefficient ruler. When he assigns blame wherever others suggests it should go, he has no
real protection when the architect points the blame at him. After all, he decided the chief
builder was to blame in the first place, and agreed with each progression from there; he
can hardly change his mind now. As such, he is, in theory, the final guilty party in the list,
the one who cannot escape blame as the others have. Instead, he proposes that there are
men wiser than he is in his country, and wishes to consult one of them instead. To
continue the analogy of the trial from earlier, the King has essentially appealed to a higher
court of law. More than that, however, the King is now proposing to share his rule with
someone else because the case is too complicated for his own judgment. Seth is clearly
not trying to create a relatable or appealing monarch here — because if the King cannot
judge all crimes, what exactly does he do for his people?
Vikram Seth wastes very few words in his tale; after all, each verse has to be written in a
precise length or way, and eight syllables are not many. He clearly intends for the reader
to be questioning a great deal about his tale, as it reaches its most absurd plot
developments yet: first, that the wisest man in the country is named so because he is the
oldest man in the country; and second, that his solution to the dilemma is to hang the arch
itself, an inanimate object built by the various builders questioned earlier. The culprit
cannot be the archway, and even if it was, the archway cannot be killed. The old man
notably speaks in a quivering voice, without confidence, and is clearly not a wise
councillor; Seth appears to be inviting the reader to muse on the relationships between
age and wisdom, and more than that what constitutes wisdom at all — what would a wise
person decree for such a case? Likely it would be to not hang people for constructing a
shorter-than-needed structure.

Can’t Hang a Scaffold (Stanzas 26-28)

Now that the King’s councillors (who apparently were not wise enough to intervene
earlier) have questioned the necessity of hanging the arch, The Take of Melon City can
embrace its first logical plot point: people who are following these events are getting really
tired of them. The entire story up until this point has been a series of stalls and
postponements, and it is likely that the King’s people are beginning to seriously question
his effectiveness as a ruler, as he cannot pronounce guilt nor sentence on what is surely
12
the most simple crime imaginable. By making the common people under the King’s rule a
logical-minded group, and keeping the King and his advisors in a state of idiocy, Seth
invites the reader to question the necessity and effectiveness of a monarchy as a system of
rule. It makes sense to think of The Tale of Melon City as being a political commentary in
some form, and here is an early indication that it likely is so — the people are beginning to
question their ruler, who has decided that because the arch touched his head, it should be
immune from retaliation.

Guilt At Last (Stanzas 27-37)

As likely seemed inevitable, the King is finally deposed. Possibly less inevitable-seeming is
the way he was deposed. The King realizes that the crowd wants him to make good on his
word and hang a culprit, so he orders the hanging of someone, anyone, immediately.
Unfortunately for him, by the very virtue that started all of this — his height — he is the
only person who fits the criteria for hanging, because only he can fit in the gallows. By
weight of his own desperate decree, the King is executed. Vikram Seth uses a distinctly
passive voice for the couplet describing the event, never actually assigning blame for the
regicide — but of course, assigning blame is what this government does least effectively of
all, so the identity of the executioner is hardly an important point. That shortly before his
death, the King decides that guilt isn’t really that important a thing to establish is just one
more thing to add to the list of things that makes this King a terribly ineffective ruler, and
concludes Seth’s unhappy portrayal of monarchy.
With the King dead, his ministers and councillors rejoice, because of their concern that if
they had not hanged someone soon, something bad might have happened to the
monarchy. The sheer absurdity of their comments stands out strongly, even in this poem
— something very bad did happen to the monarchy. In attempting to avoid a potential
problems, the ministers have created a scenario that is nearly as bad, and call it a blessing.
This could be Vikram Seth’s own criticism of ineffectual problem-solving by governments
or monarchies in particular, and his extremely simple sample problem makes this a fairly
logical conclusion to draw.

A Melon City (Stanzas 38-53)

If the hanging of the King is Seth’s attempt to criticize governmental problem managing,
then the following verses are likely a critique of solutions. The next person to enter the
city may choose anyone they’d like to rule, now that the royal line has ended. This is
described as a “practical” decision, but it should be fairly easy to see how it’s a terrible

13
idea, and little more than a band-aid fix. To the ministers of the Crown, having a King is
what’s important, and the person’s effectiveness in the role isn’t even an afterthought.
Sure enough, the next person to pass through the city gate can only be described as “an
idiot,” and this particular idiot “likes melons.” So when he is asked who the next king of
the country should be, he replies, “a melon.” And so, a melon is crowned, and the title of
the poem, ‘The Tale of Melon City‘ suddenly makes sense. In the fifth of the above verses
appears the word “carried” in brackets, a correction to the idea that a melon could be led
anywhere. It is as though the narration is attempting to be reverent and adhere to due
ceremony, but can’t, because what it’s suggesting simply isn’t true, because this is an
unprecedented absurdity in the soon-to-be-called Melon City.
Perhaps at this point, the reader is hoping for the practical and logical people of the
kingdom to be confused and appalled at the notion that their new ruler is a melon, but
instead they are perfectly happy with the decision. If asked about it, they will simply reply
that what the King does or wants to be is of no difference to them; their life goes on, the
same as it always has, whether the king is a melon or a man. They appreciate the style of
government that is built on non-interference (and are perfectly happy not to interfere
themselves), and as long as they have their freedoms and their peace, it really is all the
same to them.
This is a surprisingly logical conclusion to such an absurd story, and it seems that if Vikram
Seth is trying to make one point in all of this, it would be that he doesn’t see the people
around him as caring so much about who governs their world, so long as their world can
go on. Having a melon for a leader is the same thing as having no leader at all, but the
message that The Tale of Melon City seems to be trying to convey is that this doesn’t have
to be a bad thing.
Despite having a very whimsical and essentially nonsensical tone, The Tale of the Melon
City is Vikram Seth’s way of taking a serious topic and making it into a more amusing
means of discussing that topic. Seth’s political musings here could be interpreted in a
number of different ways, but his general disdain for the concept of monarchy, if nothing
else, is clear, along with his relative praise of the common person. While the tale of a
melon monarch may not seem like the most relatable tale in the world, its themes and
core ideas are certain to resonate with a great many people — which, considering the
absurd nature of the story itself, is a very high praise for Vikram Seth’s skill as a poet.

Short Answer Type Questions

1. Why does the king order an arch to be constructed over the public road?

14
Ans. The cool-headed king got an arch gate constructed over the public road. He hoped to
enlighten and uplift the onlookers morally.
2. What annoyed the king as he rode down that thoroughfare?
Ans. As he rode down the road, his crown struck against the low-built arch. It was thrown
off and lost. This enraged the king.
3. ‘This is a disgrace’, said the king. How did he react?
Ans. The low-built arch hit against the king’s crown which fell to the ground and was lost.
The king took it as an insult. He ordered the chief of builders to be hanged.
4. The king, in this poem, is just and placid. Why does he then lose his temper? Does he
carry his notion of justice too far?
Ans. The king was known to be calm and cool-headed. But that was a blatant lie. He lost
his temper soon. Being just, he ordered the guilty person or thing to be hanged. But he
was an utter fool. He carried his notion of justice too far. In doing so he had invited his
own hanging.
5. How did the chief of builders, the workmen and the masons save their lives?
Ans. The chief of builders passed on the blame to the workmen. The workers in order to
save their lives blamed the brick makers and the masons. The masons put the blame on
the architect for the low arch.
6. How did the architect turn the tables on the king himself?
Ans. The architect was presented before the king to face conviction. But he reminded the
king of the changes made by the king himself in the building plan. The king became
nervous. He said he would consult the wisest man in the state on the issue.
7. Who on the old wise man’s advice was led to the gallows? Why had the proceeding to
be halted?
Ans. The old man was considered wise on the basis of his age. He advised the king to hang
the arch itself which had thrown the crown off the king’s head.
8. How did the king save his own skin when the architect turned the accusing finger at
him?
Ans. The architect blamed the king himself for making faulty changes in the original
building plan. The king found himself cornered. So he declared that he would seek the
advice of the wisest man in the state on that tricky issue.
9. How did circumstances lead to the execution of the king himself?
Ans. On the wise man’s advice, the king ordered the arch to be executed. But a councillor
defended the arch. The people, however, were restless. They demanded action and

15
hanging. So a noose was set up to hang somebody. The king alone was tall enough to fit
the noose. Hence, the king himself had to be hanged.
10. What opinion do you form about the king from the story?
Ans. This story highlights the foolishness of a so-called calm and just ruler. The king carried
his notion of justice too far. He not only lost his own life but also gave the chance to
another fool, a melon, to occupy the throne.
11. What custom was enforced to get a new ruler?
Ans. The state custom to find a new ruler was very funny. The first person to pass the city
gates was to choose the ruler of the state. The idiot who passed by liked melons. Soon his
suggestion, a melon was put on the throne.
12. Comment on the calibre of the king, his ministers, the people and the customs of the
state.
Ans. All the characters in the story are block-headed. The king was crazy and brainless. The
ministers followed the old custom blindly and set a melon on the throne. The custom to
choose the ruler was just silly. The people, at large, were no good. They demanded a
hanging even if it was their own king. They did not mind who the king was, as long as they
could live peacefully.
13. Why have the king’s ministers been described as practical-minded men? What is
ironical about the description?
Ans. The ministers were in a hurry to find a new ruler. They lacked practical wisdom when
they followed the old custom. They detained a fool and asked him to name the new ruler.
What an irony!
14. How was the new king of the state finally selected and crowned?
Ans. The old custom was followed while selecting a new ruler. The first person to pass by
the city gate was asked to name the king. That idiot, being fond of melons, named melon
for the royal seat. And a Melon was crowned and set up on the throne.
15. Why do the common people accept the melon-king without any protest?
Ans. The common people valued their peaceful living and freedom more than the quality
of the king. It mattered little for them whether the king was wise or foolish, so long as he
did not harass the people.
Long Answer Questions
1. Narrate ‘The Tale of Melon City’ in about 100 words. What message does it convey?
Ans. The king of that nameless state was known to be just and cool-headed. But truly
speaking, he was foolish, crazy and brainless. Once he got constructed an arch above the
public road for the mental and moral improvement of the onlookers. One day as he rode
16
down that highway, the low-built arch hit the king’s crown. The angry king decided to hang
the culprit. He summoned the builders, the workers, the masons, the architect to undergo
punishment. They all passed on the blame to each other. On the old wise man’s advice,
the arch itself was to be hanged. But a councillor saved it. But somebody had to be
hanged. The king alone was tall enough to fit the noose which was set very high. He was
hanged. As per the custom, whosoever passed the city gates first, had the honour of
naming the next king. That day a fool was the first person to pass by the gates and he was
asked to choose the king. He spoke only one-word “Melon” to all the questions and the
Melon was crowned. The common people had no say in the selection. They only wanted to
live in peace and liberty.
2. The king was just and placid. How did he carry his notion of justice a bit too far?
Ans. The king was known to be cool-headed, fair and just. But he was, in fact, a fool with a
wavering mind. He foolishly thought that the victory gate would improve the people
morally and mentally. He lost his temper when his crown fell off his head under the arch of
low height. He at once ordered hanging for the builder, the workers, the masons and the
architect. He carried his sense of justice a little too far. He agreed to hang the arch itself.
He finally ordered his own hanging. The story is humorous and ironical.

The Adventure
By: Jayant Narlikar
Introduction
The chapter ‘The Adventure’ is a story about Professor Gangadharpant Gaitonde who is
strangely in a different world. He knows it is Pune but the facts are different from what he
believes. He decided to go to Bombay via train ‘Jijamata Express’. When he reached
Bombay, things were different. When he decides to investigate the history, he finds some
surprising facts. The East India Company was still ruling and the Battle of Panipat had been
won by Marathas. It was different from what he knew and had studied. The East India
Company was taken aback after events of 1857 and the Battle of Panipat had been won by
Mughals.
Summary
Professor Gaitonde was travelling from Pune to Bombay via the Jijamata Express, a train
which was faster than the Deccan Queen. As he was crossing towns and villages, he met a
man named ‘Khan Sahib’ who talked about his business and chatted about several things.
They got off at Victoria Terminus station which was neat and clean. It had British officers,
Parsees and Anglo-Indian staff all around. He was confused as to how the East India
17
Company was ruling the country as according to his facts, they had fled away after the
events of 1857.
He went to the Hornby road and noticed that the shops were different. He entered the
Forbes building and inquired about Mr. Vinay Gaitonde but as checked by the receptionist,
no such man had ever worked there. He went to the Town Hall and sat in the reading
room. He took five books related to the history and decided to go through them one by
one and check how the facts had changed. He started investigating from the period of
Asoka to the third battle of Panipat.
According to the fifth volume ‘Bhausahebanchi Bakhar’, he found out that Marathas had
won the Battle of Panipat and spread their influence all over India after that. He was
confused as it was different from what he knew so far. After the victory, India was moved
to the path of democracy. There were no longer any kings ruling and democratic parties
had been set up. The professor started liking India as he kept reading further about it. It
was different from the one he believed he saw. This country knew how to stand on its feet
and it was no longer slave under the white man.
As he was going through the book, the librarian told him to finish since they were closing
the library. It was eight o clock. He asked about carrying the books with him as he would
return the next morning and slipped the Bakhar book into his left pocket. He checked into
a guest house and had his dinner. He decided to walk towards Azad Maidan. He noticed a
large crowd of people going towards a pandal. A lecture was going on but he noticed
something unusual. The presidential chair was empty. The speaker was talking and the
crowd was continuously moving inside and outside.
He could not control himself and moved towards the stage and sat on the chair. The crowd
was taken aback and started asking him to get up and move away. He tried to talk to them
but they started throwing several objects at him such as tomatoes, eggs, etc. Soon the
crowd moved towards him to push him away and he was nowhere to be seen.
Next, he woke up in a hospital bed and saw Rajendra in front of him. He narrated the
whole sequence of events that took place and Rajendra listened to him amazed. The
professor was confused as to where he was and if he had been in a coma for the past two
days. What was the experience he just had, was it real or not.
Rajendra explained to him that it happened because of two theories – Catastrophe theory
and lack of determinism in Quantum theory. Catastrophe theory states that a small
change in any situation can result in a shift in behaviour. In reality, the Marathas lost their
leader – Bhausaheb and Vishwarao and hence they lost the battle. But Professor saw that
the bullet missed and Vishwarao was not dead.
18
Professor then showed him the torn page of the Bakhar book that he had in his pocket.
Rajendra read it carefully and told him that realities can be different for different people.
What he thought had happened is a catastrophic experience.
Rajendra told him that in the case of electrons, one cannot predict which path the electron
takes at a point of time. He told him that it is the lack of determinism in Quantum theory
and explained to him what it meant. In one world, the electron may be found here and in
another, it may be found in another place but in the third world. It may be at different
locations. Once the observer knows about the correct placing of the electrons in every
world, it might happen that an alternative world exists at the same time.
Hence, the professor was in two different worlds at the present time. He had real-life
experience in an alternative reality and he came back from another world. Both the worlds
had different histories and different sets of events. The professor wanted to know why he
was the one to make the transition. Rajendra told him that at the time of the collision with
the truck, the professor was thinking about the catastrophe theory and its role in the war.
He was also thinking about the Battle of Panipat at that moment, so the neurons in his
brain acted as a trigger and made the transition.
The professor was in that alternative world for the last two days.
Short Answer Type Questions (30 to 40 words)
1.What sort of ‘Adventure’ has been narrated by Jayant Narlikar?
Ans. The adventure of Professor Gangadharpant was not real or physical. He was a
historian. He wanted to know what would have happened if the Marathas had lost the
Battle of Panipat. For two days during his unconsciousness, he visited the new Bombay
and had a bitter experience in Azad Maidan.
2. Who was Professor Gaitonde? What was his plan in Bombay?
Ans. Professor Gaitonde or Gangadharpant was a historian. He had written five volumes
on history. But his research work was still going on. He was on his way to Bombay. He
planned to go to a big library and consult the history books there to find out how the
present state of affairs was reached.
3. What was Gangadharpant’s experience on way to Bombay?
Ans. Gangadharpant travelled by the Jijamata express along the Pune-Bombay route. His
plan was to consult some history books at the library. At Sarhad station, an Anglo-Indian
checked the permits. That was the place where the British Raj began. He got the company
of one Khan Sahib on the train. He noticed that the city was quite different from what he
had known about it.
4. What was Gangadhar’s experience when he reached a small station Sarhad?
19
Ans. It was Gangadhar’s first visit to this new Bombay. Every blue carriage carried the
words Greater Bombay metropolitan railway’ and also a small Union Jack painted on it. It
gently reminded him that he had entered the British territory. An Anglo-Indian checked
the train permits of the passengers.
5. What had Professor Gaitonde not expected in Bombay?
Ans. Professor Gaitonde was prepared for many shocks but he had not expected to see the
domination of East India Company in Bombay. History books said that the company had
been wound up after 1857. But here in Bombay it still seemed to be alive and flourishing.
He found a different set of shops and departmental stores and big bank buildings as in
England.
6. What for did Professor Gaitonde enter the Forbes building? What was his experience
there?
Ans. The professor went to Forbes building to meet Vinaya gained, his own son. The
receptionist searched through the telephone list and directory of employees. There was
no one bearing that name. It was a big blow. He felt that so far everything had been
shocking and surprising so the blow of non-existence of his son was not totally
unexpected.
7. What did the professor do in the Town Hall library?
Ans. The professor asked for the history books he himself had written. There was no
change in the events up to the death of Aurangzeb. The change had occurred in the last
volume. He read the description of the Battle of Panipat. Abdali was defeated by the
Maratha army led by Sadashiv Rao Bhau and his nephew Vishwas Rao. This event led to a
power struggle. It established the supremacy of the Marathas. The British company was
reduced to pockets of Influence near Bombay. The Marathas set up their science research
centres. They accepted the help of English experts.
8. What is the professor’s opinion was the cause of expanding British influence in India?
Ans. Professor Gangadhar felt glad to learn that the white men could not have expanded
their hold if the Marathas had not allowed them for commercial reasons to stay on in
Bombay. That lease was to expire in 2001 according to the treaty of 1908.
9. What did the professor wish to find out in history books?
Ans. He wanted to find the answer to his question about how the Marathas had won the
Battle of Panipat. He found a clue in the book on history titled Bakhars. Vishwasrao had a
narrow escape from being killed by a bullet that brushed past his ear. This boosted the
morale of the Maratha army and they fought bravely.
10. What two things did the professor put into his pockets at the Town Hall?
20
Ans. He put some notes in his right pocket and the book, the ‘Bakhar’, into his left pocket.
11. What bitter experience did the professor have at the meeting in Azad Maidan?
Ans. A lecture was in progress when the professor reached Azad Maidan. Seeing the
presidential chair vacant, he occupied it swiftly. The audience protested. They said the
chair was symbolic. But when the professor began to address the gathering, he was
physically removed from the dais.
12. How did Bakhar’s account of the Battle of Panipat differ from what other history books
said?
Ans. All the history books said that the Maratha army had lost the battle. Vishwasrao was
hit by a bullet and he fell. That broke the morale of the army. That was not what the
professor’s own copy of the Bakhar said. It said that Vishwas Rao had a narrow escape as
the bullet brushed past his ear. The professor was dying to know the facts.
13. How did Rajendra rationalise the professor’s experience?
Ans. Rajendra tried to explain the professor’s experience on the basis of two scientific
theories. The professor had passed through a catastrophic experience. The Maratha and
the Abdali army were well matched. So a lot depended on the morale of the troops and
the leadership. The point at which Vishwas Rao was killed, proved to be the turning point.
They lost their morale and suffered defeat. But the Bakhar’s page presented an opposite
view. It said that the bullet missed Vishwas Rao, and that boosted the morale of the
soldiers. The professor was thinking of this aspect when he was hit by the truck.
14. How did Rajendra try to explain the mystery of reality?
Ans. We normally experience reality directly with our senses. But what we see is not the
whole truth. That is proved if we take the example of an electron. Fired from a source, it
can go in any direction, breaking all laws of physics. This is called lack of determination in
quantum theory. The professor, said Rajendra, had made a transition from one world that
he knew to another that could have been. The observer can experience one reality, but
alternative realities also exist. The professor had also experienced a different world
without any physical movement when he became unconscious after being hit by a truck.
15. ‘But why did I make the transition?’ What explanation did Rajendra give to the
professor?
Ans. Rajendra guessed that the transition must have been caused by some interaction.
Perhaps the professor had been thinking at the time of collision about the catastrophic
theory and its role in wars. The professor admitted that he had been wondering at that
time what course history would have taken if the Marathas had won the Battle of Panipat.
16. Why did Gangadhar decide to cancel his thousandth address?
21
Ans. Gangadhar informed the organisers of the Panipat seminar that he won’t be able to
keep his commitment. The reason was his bitter experience at the Azad Maidan meeting
when the hostile crowd refused to listen to him and threw eggs and tomatoes at him.
Important Long/ Detailed Answer Type Questions- to be answered in about 100 -150
words each Value based questions-
Long Answer Questions
1. Describe Gangadharpant’s journey by train from Pune to Bombay.
Ans. Professor Gaitonde (Gangadharpant) travelled from Pune to Bombay by train. The
Jijamata express had its first stop at Lonavala. The ghat section was quite familiar to him.
The train passed through Kalyan.
He made a plan of action in Bombay. He was a historian. He had written five volumes. He
planned to go to a big library and read history books to find out how the present state of
affairs had been reached. Thereafter, he would discuss his findings with Rajendra
Deshpande.
The train stopped beyond the long tunnel at a small station, Sarhad. An Anglo-Indian
checked the permits. This was the place where the British Raj began. Pant had not been to
this Bombay before. He talked with his fellow passenger Khan sahib. The professor got
some information on life in British India. He also noticed the words written and the Union
Jack painted on the carriage. He had not expected all that.
2. Give a brief account of Professor Gaitonde’s stay and study of history books at Town
Hall library. What riddle was he keen to solve?
Ans. In Bombay, the professor went to the Town Hall library. He asked for the five volumes
he had written. Up to the death of Aurangzeb, there was no change in history. The change
had taken place in the last volume. Turning over the pages, he reached the exact point
where history had taken a different turn. It was the Battle of Panipat in which the Maratha
army had defeated Abdali. The victorious army was led by the young Vishwasrao.
Thereafter began the power struggle in India. It was his own style of writing.
The Maratha victory dampened the spirit and plans of the East India Company. its
influence was reduced to Bombay region. In the 19th century, the Peshwas needed the
help of the British at their centres for science and technology. They gave an opportunity to
the company to extend its influence. Then came democracy. The professor could not help
comparing the country he knew with what he was witnessing around him.
3. How did Rajendra Deshpande apply his theory of catastrophic experience regarding the
Battle of Panipat?

22
Ans. Gangadharpant narrated to Rajendra his experience at the Azad Maidan meeting. For
two days he was in a coma. He had met with an accident. He had now returned to the
world he was familiar with. He asked Rajendra to explain where he had spent those days.
He admitted that just before the collision he had been thinking of the catastrophic theory
and how it could change the course of history. He produced a page from the Bakhar to
prove that his mind was working normally. The page described that Vishwasrao had not
escaped the bullet, he had rather been hit and killed by the bullet. It was just contrary to
what his own history book said. And he wanted to know the facts.
4. How did Rajendra explain the concept of reality with the example of movement of an
electron?
Ans. Rajendra Deshpande tried to rationalise the professor’s experience on the basis of
two scientific theories. It was true that Gangadharpant had passed through a strange
catastrophic experience. The juncture at which Vishwas Rao was killed in the Battle of
Panipat proved to be the turning point. The Maratha soldiers lost their morale and fighting
spirit. They lost the battle.
Rajendra then moved to his second point about reality. Reality is not exactly what we
experience directly with our senses. Reality can have other manifestations also. For
example, the electron does not follow the laws of science when it moves. It is called the
lack of determinism in quantum theory. The electron can be found in different places, and
each is real. It happens by making a transition. The professor had also experienced two
worlds—one that was present, the other that might have been.

23