Q.1. How does Liaquat Ali Khan justify the demand for Pakistan?

 
Ans. Muslims knew from experience that in a free India dominated by Hindus
their culture would be destroyed. This was the basic reason for their demand for
a free country of their own. 
The demand for Pakistan was in no way unreasonable. The Muslims and Hindus
were divided by very serious religious, cultural, and social differences. 
The Muslims believe in the unity of Allah. They believe in the Prophet of Arabia
and Jesus Christ, and the prophets mentioned in the Old Testament. They
believe in the equality of all men. They believe that every man and woman has
the right to own property. Their religion encourages the distribution of wealth. 
The Muslims were a nation by any definition, a nation bigger than most nations of
the world. They were in majority in many large and contiguous areas of the sub-
continent.
Q.2. What difficulties Pakistan had to face immediately after its
establishment? 
Ans. Immediately after its establishment, Pakistan had to face numerous
difficulties. Setting up the administration of a new state is never easy, but in the
case of Pakistan, The difficulties were extraordinary.
We had no flag and no capital. There was practically no administrative
machinery. We had no engineers and traders. There was no industry in the new
state. Pakistan was allotted an army but its men and officers were scattered in
distant parts of India. Only a very small number could reach Pakistan in 1947.
The major portion of’ its share of military equipment was never handed over to
Pakistan. 
Millions of Muslims were forced to flee from Bharat and come to Pakistan. They
were in a miserable condition. They needed food, shelter, and medical aid. This
alone was a huge task. The unity of the people and their firm faith, however,
conquered all difficulties. 
Q.3 What, in Liaquat Ali Khan’s opinion, the West, particularly America,
owes to the people of Asia?
Ans. Almost all countries of Asia remained under Western colonial rule for two or
three centuries. They were kept backward in all fields of life. They had no
opportunity to acquire the knowledge of science and technology. The result is
that, although they are free nations today, they are very poor and undeveloped. 
The people Asia wish to get rid of their misery and poverty, but they need help.
They are aware of the huge difference between their standard of living and that
or the West. If the West does not help these backward countries in developing
their resources, their impatience and discontent will go on increasing. They will
remain unstable and will become a danger to world peace. 
In today’s world, war and peace and prosperity are indivisible. Discontent and
instability in one part of the world are bound to affect other parts. America and
other countries or the West must help Asia for the sake of world peace. They
must help this vast continent in the fields of technology and industry. This will
enable millions or people to overc.0Jne their misery and poverty.
Q.4 What are the demands that our freedom makes on us? 
Ans. The first duty of a free nation is to protect its freedom. If it cannot defend its
freedom, it disgraces not only itself but also the free people of the whole world.
Therefore, our first duty is to protect our freedom. And this would require
continuous effort and vigilance.
Freedom from foreign rule only is not real or complete freedom. It is only the first
stage, though a very important stage. People should be able to choose their
government is not enough. True freedom means freedom from poverty, disease,
and ignorance. When a nation overcomes these evils, it will become a truly free
nation. 
During the last two or three centuries of foreign rule, we have remained
backward while the West has achieved great progress and prosperity. We have
to march on al double pace to catch up with the developed countries of the world.
While holding fast to our faith we must acquire modern technology very quickly to
make Pakistan a prosperous country. 
Q .5 How, according to Liaquat Ali Khan, did the creation of two states in
the Indian sub-continent contribute to the creation of stability in Asia? 
Ans. Undivided India was a vast sub-continent where one hundred million
Muslins lived with three hundred million other people, mostly Hindus. The
Muslims and the Hindus were in fact two very different nations who had almost
nothing in common. 
The Muslims believe in the unity of God and in all the prophets. They believe in
the equality of all human beings. Their religion prescribes laws that encourage
social justice.
The Hindus worship many gods. They believe in a caste system that divided
human beings into superior and inferior classes. It is a sin for the superior castes
even to touch a person belonging to the inferior or ‘untouchable’ class, 
It was a fact that these two nations could never live in peace in one country when
the British left India. The Hindus were determined to rule free India according to
their own ideology which did not tolerate any other culture. The Muslims were
equally determined to defend their religion and culture. They were numerous
enough and strong enough to do so. 
The result of this would have been a never-ending civil war in India. The creation
of Pakistan did avert this very dangerous situation. Later history or the relations
between Pakistan and Bharat has confirmed this.

Question Answers Notes of The Eclipse by Virginia

Q. Why were people heading north? Describe their state of mind (The
Eclipse). 
Ans. One June night Euston Railway Station in north western London was
crowded with people. They were not ordinary passengers but they had gathered
there to board a train heading towards north. They were not going north on a
pleasure trip. It was a strange purpose which had brought them there. They were
going to Yorkshire to see the dawn. But it was not an ordinary sunrise they
expected to see. 
That night, it seemed, the entire population of England was traveling northward to
see the dawn. The sky had become more real and important than the earth, and
all these people ere going north to watch the eclipse of the sun. 
Scattered on the slope of a fall, waiting for the dramatic rising and eclipse of the
sun, they seemed to have lost their identities. They looked like statues in a pale
world. They felt that they were the inhabitants of some ancient age waiting in
wonder and awe to salute the sun. 
Q.2 Explain Virginia, Woolf’s remark, ‘The earth we stand on is made of
colour; the colour can be blown out; and then we stand on a dead leaf…… 
Ans. In her essay ‘The Eclipse’ Virginia Woolf describes in a highly dramatic
manner a solar eclipse, probably the solar eclipse of June 29, 1927 which was
visible in England. 
Before the rising of the sun everything looked pale. The river, the farmhouses,
the fields and flowers were all pale, colourless. Then suddenly the sun rose and
the trees turned green, and the villages blue brown under the pale blue sky. 
The sun began its usual march on the sky with patches of white clouds. It dashed
through the clouds but the moon was creeping up the horizon, and covered the
shining disk of the sun. All the colour vanished from the scene. The flesh and
blood of the world was gone. It became a strange skeleton — withered and
dead. 
What Virginia Woolf wishes to convey to the reader is that the colours that give
our world its beauty and splendour ale the creation of light. And the source of
light is the sun. It also provides the warmth that is necessary for all life. If the
sunlight does not reach the earth, it would wither and die.

Q. How does Lawrence contracts and spring in his essay “Whistling of

Birds”? 
Ans. In his essay “Whistling of Birds”, Lawrence describes the destruction that
winter brings to the birds and then the new life that comes with spring. 
In severe winter when frost covers the earth, birds begin to die. Their torn partly-
eaten bloody bodies lay scattered in fields and under hedges. The sweet silvery
whistling of the birds is heard nowhere. There is death and frost and silence. The
earth is dead and the music makers of nature are either dead or silent. 
Then one day, the frost begins to turn soft and melt. The winter in on the run. The
doves, the thrushes, and all the other birds who have survived the deadly winter
know it. They begin to coo and whistle. At first, their song is faint and feeble and
broken. But gradually it becomes strong and sure and triumphant. 
One is rather shocked at the first whistle of birds. How could they begin to sing
when the torn bloody bodies of dead birds can be seen everywhere. But they
have no choice as we have no choice. The spring has come and they have to
welcome it, and rejoice in the new life that has taken hold of them. 
Q. Explain Lawrence’s remarks. “Ii strange, e incompatibility of death with
life. It is one or the other.” 
Ans. In this essay, Whistling of Birds” Lawrence attempts to def life and death as
two opposed states, two opposite words never coexist. While there is life, there is
no death. It is all life and happiness. When there is death, there is death on all
sides, complete and overwhelming. 
Death is silence, darkness, and destruction. When it demands, it kills the earth. It
enters the souls of living things apparently putting an end to all warmth and
music of life. But perhaps it cannot touch the core of life within us. 
Life reasserts, and then there is no death. The destruction and death which has
been caused cannot hold back the march of life. The blackbird cannot stop its
song and mourn for the dead. Neither can we. The song comes from within us,
from the core of life in our impulses. We may hesitate, for a moment perhaps, to
acknowledge the rebirth of life but we cannot resist it. It comes upon us from the
unknown and takes hold of us. The world of death is dead, and the dead must be
buried. Where life is, death is not.
Lawrence’s ideas of life and death may not be rationally and philosophically
defended. They should be understood as an attempt to describe the impressions
produced by the onslaught of winter and the coming of spring.

Take the plunge

Why did Gloria Emerson make the parachute jump?

Ans. Gloria Emerson was a journalist working in a women’s news section. She
wanted to do something brave, something exciting instead of writing little silly
stories about women’s shoes or skirts. 
She confesses that she was neither daring nor confident; she had a bad back,
uncertain ankle, and defective vision. Still, she wanted to do something daring,
something unusual. But she seemed to have no skill, no talent for anything.
Then somebody told her that jumping from a plane required no special talent or
extraordinary physical strength. Skydiving caught her imagination. It was, she
was told “the world’s most stimulating and soul-satisfying sport” and “as safe as
swimming.” So, in a reckless moment in May, she decided to take the plunge.
She wanted to experience the thrill and excitement of drifting through space with
a parachute above her. She had no time to think that if wind grew stormy, she
might fall on the high-tension wires, or hang on a tree.
Q. Describe the havoc caused by the atom bomb in Nagasaki.
Ans. The 9th of August, 1945 was a beautiful summer day in Nagasaki. Ichimaru,
a first-year medical student, could not go to his colleagues that day. He was
sitting in his room in the lodging house. 
At 11 a.m. he heard a 13-29 passing overhead. A few minutes later he saw a
flash of brilliant yellow, and with it came the huge blast of wind. It cut a hole in the
roof and shattered all glass. He went outside; the sky had turned black pouring
down back the rain. The stone walls between houses had crumbled. There were
fires all around. 
The next day Ichimaru managed to enter the Urakami area. All buildings had
burnt or collapsed. There were dead bodies everywhere. He heard women crying
in the destroyed fields. The wooden building of the medical school was
completely destroyed. Only the skeleton of the hospital remained standing. 
Some of the students and nurses were still alive but unable to move. All were to
die in the next few weeks. He met many survivors in public-school buildings.
There were cries of pain and a terrible stench. All these people were to die within
weeks. He and some friends collected the dead bodies and burned on a pile of
wood. 
Q.2 How did Ichimaru help the victims of the atomic explosion.
Ans. On August 10, 1945, a day after the explosion of the atom bomb, Ichimaru
was able to reach the medical school building in the Uurakami area of the city.
The school building was completely destroyed. 
There were some students still alive in the ruins of the building. There were some
more survivors who had escaped (o the small hill behind the school. They were
weak, bloody, and dirty. He carried many of his friends on his back down the hill.
Then he hitched a cart to his bicycle and took them to their homes. He also
contacted the families of other survivors so that they could take them home. 
So many people had died that the disposal of the dead bodies was difficult.
Ichimaru with the help of some other persons gathered the bodies of many
friends and burned them in a pile of wood.

Q. Explain the moral of the essay ‘My Tailor.

Ans. Stephen Leacock’s ‘My Tailor’ a half-humorous, half-serious essay has a
moral. The author, however, does not leach in so many words. He only hints at it
and lets the reader find if he wishes so. 
Leacock had known the tailor for thirty years but only as a tailor, not as a man.
He had always found him in the back of his shop, his tape around his neck and a
smile welcome on his race. 
Leacock ordered a suit. They chose the material, a dark blue serge as they had
done year after year. The tailor knew the questions Leacock would ask. Leacock
knew the answers, the tailor would give. But they always went through the drill’
as a necessary part of their relationship. 
They never found time to know each other as human beings. Leacock never
thought of him as a man who could have a family, who could have a personal life
with ordinary human pleasures and problems. 
It was only after the tailor’s death that Leacock came to know that the tailor was
not a just tailor, he was also a human being. He realizes with sadness that we do
no! care to escape from our roles and knew one another as human beings. This
is the moral 
Q. Why does Leacock regard the Tailor as immortal? 
Ans. Leacock always found the tailor standing there in the back of his shop, his
tap around his neck, a smile on his face. He looked almost like a statue,
unchangeable and permanent. 
The tailor would always suggest a dark blue serge or tweed for the suit Leacock
ordered. Then without waiting for his response he would ask his assistant to take
down some of those dark blues. When this matter of choosing the material was
settled to his satisfaction, he would measure Leacock’s round chest, and tell his
assistant to add half an inch to the chest. After this exchanged remark about the
weather which was always pleasant. 
They went through the same procedure when selecting the material. There never
was even a slight change in the tailor’s attitude and behaviour during the thirty
years that Leacock had his suits him. Leacock had become accustomed to
seeing the tailor in his usual place and posture. He never imagined that anything,
even death, could take him away from the back of his shop. 
Q. Explain how Leacock tries to make the reader sympathizes with the
tailor. 
Ans. In the first part of the essay, Leacock describes the tailor as he has seen
him for thirty years. He stood there in the back part of his shop, his tape around
his neck, a smile on his face wailing to welcome his customers. He appeared
very sure of 
Himself. He did not talk much with his customers. He was polite. even a little
flattering at tires. But he seemed somewhat formal, impersonal, and a little
ridiculous. His attitude did not encourage customers to develop even a slightly
personal relationship with him. Thus, we do not see the man behind the tailor.
The reader is amused by his attitude and behaviour. 
The second half of the essay shows us the man behind the tailor. This man is
something more than the impersonal, confident, ridiculous tailor. Here we see a
man who has a daughter and a wife. His business has not been very successful.
When his debts are paid, his wife would not inherit much. Now we see a man
facing the hardships of life like other ordinary human beings. The reader
recognizes the common bond between the tailor and himself and sympathizes
with the tailor.
Q. How does Lewis Thomas compare computers with human beings?
Ans. Lewis Thomas’ essay “To Err is Human” is about human beings, computers,
and errors they make.
Human beings make errors. In fact, the ability to make mistakes is the power of
their nature. They cannot avoid making errors however, carefully they think and
work. If they did not have this gift of being wrong, they would not be able to do
anything useful. They learn by “trial and error”, and not by “trial and rights”.They
seem to joy making mistakes; bigger the mistake, greater the joy.
Error opens the way to progress. It compels us to think and rethink. It makes us
explore alternatives, make more mistakes, and somehow get to the right results
someday.
Computers are not expected to make errors. If they send you the wrong bills or
do some other mischief, it is supposed to be the result of the computer operator’s
fault.
Lewis Thomas thinks that computers do make mistakes. They have been build
by human beings. and are extensions of the human brain. As such they must
share man’s gift for making mistakes. The error is again human.
Q. Explain Lewis Thomas’ statement, “It may be that this (making mistakes)
is a uniquely human gift, perhaps stipulated in our genetic instructions”.
Ans. Lewis Thomas believes that making mistakes is a gift that has been given
only to human beings. Perhaps the instructions for making mistakes are written in
our genes that govern our behaviour. It means that nature wants us to make
mistakes.
Making mistakes is a necessary result of man’s freedom to explore and analyze
and find his own way. His instincts do not limit him to a certain behaviour. He has
the power to choose. He has the desire to know about things around him.
He wishes to know the reality of things and the cause behind natural
phenomena. In his search, he has to observe, make guesses, and verify them. It
is not a simple and easy process. Wrong choices and guesses are made
frequently because every alternative is to be tired to find the right one. This is the
“trial and error” process. For human beings, it is the only way to learn.

Q. Why does Shaw say that doctors are not men of science?
Ans. A large number of people think that doctors are men of science but Shaw
does not agree with them. In this essay, he explains why doctors are no more
scientific than their tailors.
It is very rare that a practicing doctor makes a contribution to science. He has no
knowledge of the scientific method. The scientific method demands a certain
attitude of mind and certain skills. It has to be learned. One has to get rid of one’s
likes and dislikes and look at things without pre-convinced ideas or opinions.
Observation and collection of evidence require skill and expertise. Drawing
conclusions from the evidence and satisfies requires even greater expertise.
Doctors, excepting a few, have not learned the basic attitude and skills of the
specific method. So when they try to draw conclusions from what they have
observed in their clinics, they draw wrong and dangerous conclusions.
Q. What, according to Shaw, is the distinction between a quack and a
qualified doctor?
Ans. Shaw does not see any real distinction between a quack and a qualified
doctor. Both are mainly interested in earning their bread.
Unqualified doctors practice as hygienists, and earn large incomes. Bonesetters
are not qualified to practice as orthopedic surgeons, but ey are making fortunes.
Both the ignorant and the educated go to these quack.
Some of the most successful qualified doctors use the same methods as a quack
does for the treatment of disease. There is practically no difference between the
science of the herbalist and the science of a qualified doctor.
A doctor would give a strong dose of digitalis to a patient whose heart is
depressed because it is considered a specific drug for heart. A herbalist also
treats his heart patient with the same drug. None of them will pause to think that
the symptoms described by the patient may suggest nothing more serious than
boredom or tiredness, and may require no strong remedy than some rest or a
change of climate.
If at all there is a distinction between a qualified doctor and a quack. It is mainly
this the qualified doctor has the authority to sign a death certificate, the quack
has no such authority. However, both of them have equal opportunities to do so.

What is the beauty industry, and why has it not been affected by the
general depression in trade? 
Ans. The beauty industry is the industry that manufactures cosmetics, waist
reducing belts, massage machines, and many more such products for the
maintenance of physical beauty. It is a big and prosperous industry, though still, it
is lagging behind the major American industries such as narcotic drugs, and
films. 
The beauty industry has remained unaffected by the general economic
depression. American women continue to spend one hundred and fifty-six million
pounds a year to beautify their faces and bodies. They have cut their expenditure
on other things but not on beauty products. Why is it so? 
One reason is, of course, the increase in the prosperity of the common man. 
The lower and middle classes are more prosperous today than ever before. They
can afford to spend money on their faces. 
The other and more important reasons are the change in our attitude towards the
merely physical beauty and the change in the status of women. 
‘The merely physical beauty’ is no more considered evil. The present generation
demands justice for the body. 
Women, today, are more free and independent than ever before. They have,
now, the right to look attractive, and use as many beauty aids as they can afford
to buy. A heavily, even ridiculously, a made-up woman may cause an aesthetic
shock, but not a moral shock. 
Q. Do women get something for the enormous expenditure of money on
beauty products? 
Ans. Women certainly profit from the use of beauty products. Now old women are
becoming rare. In a few years’ time, it will be really hard to find a woman with
white hair, wrinkled face, hollow cheeks, and a bent back. Mothers will not look
much different from their daughters. This will be made possible partly by
cosmetics, cosmetic surgery, injections or paraffin wax, and partly by
improvement in health. 
This, however, does not mean that the beauty industry has really made women
beautiful. Real beauty is not just skin-deep. It is as much the matter of the soul as
of the body. Face powders, skin creams, and lipsticks cannot hide the inner
ugliness. The ugliness of stupidity, the ugliness of greed, the ugliness of
immorality will show through even the thick layers of most expensive make-up. 
Women, and men too, become beautiful when they rid themselves of evil
passions; and in this matter, unfortunately, the beauty industry cannot offer any
help. 
Q. How does Aldous Huxley define ugliness? 
Ans. Aldous Huxley believes that real beauty is as much the matter of soul as of
body. Cosmetics may hide the wrinkle of one’s face but not the ugliness of the
spirit. The ugliness of the inner self spoils the beauty of the face. 
There are many kinds of psychology ugliness. One f the ugliness of stupidity or
ignorance in other words. Many pretty women suffer from this ugliness. They
take great pains to improve their looks but never give a thought to improve their
minds. 
Greed is also an ugliness, and so is the mad pursuit of physical pleasure. The
faces of those who are always running after pleasure shoe signs of boredom and
dullness that ruin their body. 
Many pretty faces lose their attractiveness because of a strange kind of
hardness. This unpleasant appearance is often the result of heavy make-up
which hides the soft face. Sometimes this harshness of the face is a sign of
emotional trouble. 
In fact, vice is ugliness, and each kind of vice produces a special kind of
ugliness.