No Room for a Leopard by Ruskin Bond | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. No Room for a Leopard is a short story written by Ruskin Bond that was first published in his story collection A Bond with the Mountains in 1998. the story highlights the ecological crisis that we are facing in current times and is intended to increase our ecological consciousness. ‘No Room for a Leopard’, is about deforestation and its accompanying aftermath. It presents the pathetic condition of the animals after deforestation. It is a very moving account of the killing of a trusting leopard by a group of shikaris/hunters. Because of deforestation taking place in the hills and surrounding areas, many animals have been driven into the valleys inhabited by human beings. This exposes them to grave risks and fatal encounters – one such encounter has been described in this story. The story also reveals the difference between the children’s thinking and the adult thinking that has also been brought out. Children love nature. They love all the creatures. It comes naturally to them. No ulterior consideration enters their innocent minds. They can never ever think of harming the animals or exploiting them for their personal gain or profit. But the adults are solely driven by mercenary considerations. If a leopard’s skin can fetch them a good price, they would not think twice before killing him. Compassion, trust, love… these mean nothing to them. An idyllic world stands shattered because of this selfish cruelty.

Characters of No Room for a Leopard:

The main character of the story is Ruskin, a twelve-year-old boy who lives in a cottage just above the forest in the mountains with his family. The boy loves animals in the jungle and has a complete affinity with nature. He would often visit the jungle for playing, bird watching, and sightseeing. His family is aware of his activities but it appears that they do not worry about him going alone in the jungle. The boy represents innocence and the co-dependence of life forms in the world. The other characters in the story are a group of hunters or shikaris who are traveling around the jungle in search of a leopard that they wish to hunt for his skin. The shikaris represent the selfish attitude of greedy humans willing to exploit nature for their profits which is contrasted with the child’s spontaneous love for the animals.

The theme of No Room for a Leopard:

The general theme of children’s stories often involves a long hazardous journey in pursuit of something noble. The perilous journey exemplifies the value of cooperation and the quality of friendship. In this story, the boy crosses the forest and the small stream at the bottom of the hill every morning and evening, all by himself. The purpose that is apparent is ‘understanding nature in its nascent form.’ The boy develops a relationship with the jungle and its inhabitants and he has no fear of the wild animals who find him friendly. The story reminds me of Henry David Thoreau’s experiences in the wilderness of Walden. The story offers a message about the norms of the society in which we live. The transmission of ethical and social values is skillfully depicted in the story. The story highlights the difference between an innocent child’s thinking and that of the greedy, corrupt, nonchalant adult Shikaris. The story suggests that while a child is naturally inclined to love and appreciate nature, as we grow adult, we forget our connection with our environment and what remains in our mind is our own selfish, irrational attitude.

Summary of No Room for a Leopard:

Ruskin is a twelve-year-old teen boy who lives in a cottage just above the jungle on the mountain. He lives with his family. There is a stream of water flowing in the jungle down the mountain. There is a distinct path on the mountain going down but the trail of path disappears in the forest where a stream appears. At dawn, and at dusk Ruskin regularly goes for a walk around the stream. Ruskin loves the water of the stream making a soft gurgling sound flowing down the ravine. The ravine is so deep that below only shadow appears, nothing else.

He is a frequent walker through that path. Birds, monkeys, and other herbivorous animals are familiar with his smell. They know he is not a hunter. The birds would no longer fly away, they would just watch him with some curiosity and continue to munch up the tender green shoots of the oak. Not only that, when one day they saw a leopard poised on a rock about twenty feet above the young boy, they tried to warn him of the hidden danger by grunting and chattering. They thus showed their concern for him. A deep bond thus got established between Ruskin and the animals' world without their ever exchanging a single word. The leopard noticed Ruskin.

At times, he spots the silent leopard at the stream for drinking water. Ruskin often stops upon seeing it. That also happened that they both crossed each other’s path several times. Even animals can smell the intentions of man. Like other animals, the leopard sensed Ruskin as a harmless human. It trusted him. That trust developed a sense of friendship. Neither the leopard is afraid of Ruskin, nor does Ruskin have any fear of the leopard.

One day, while Ruskin was on his walk, he saw some strange men resting under a tree. He notices their modern guns that appear ominous and he gets apprehensive. These men are shikaris. They wonder about the little boy wandering in the jungle and caution him that there is a deadly carnivorous leopard lurking around the jungle and Ruskin is not safe there. Ruskin says that he is a regular visitor and he denies seeing any leopard around the area. Ruskin hears them discussing how the skin of wild leopards is in demand and how easily they can make big money by hunting down the leopard.

Ruskin is worried about the leopard. Seeing the shikaris, he gets a bad feeling about the situation and thus tries to help the leopard by denying its existence in the jungle.

Several days pass by and Ruskin does not see that leopard. One day Ruskin goes to a serene and silent hill. The silence there begins gnawing him. He sensed something was eerie. When he focuses on one cave, it is dark inside, and he feels that there is that leopard. The leopard is aware of him but isn’t afraid or startled. The leopard finds him familiar and friendly. Ruskin taught the leopard to trust human beings. Ruskin returns home silently and safely.

The next day while on a walk, he sees some men making a jubilant sound. When he sees them, he freezes with disbelief. On a bamboo pole, the same leopard’s corpse is hanging. The men were singing their songs. “We told you that there is a leopard in the jungle”, said one of the shikaris.

Ruskin feels bad about the situation. He wonders if he helped the Shikaris in hunting down the leopard. Because of him, the leopard began trusting human beings became less cautious, and got killed. He, then, remembers the lines of a poem by D.H. Lawrence: ‘There was a room in the world for a mountain lion and me’.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of Indian English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

Artificial Intelligence and Unemployment | An Analysis

Artificial Intelligence and Unemployment | An Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. Technology improves life as it brings development and prosperity. Despite this fact, the debate about whether the new technologies will cause mass unemployment and hamper the progress of underdeveloped or developing countries like India continues to make rounds. The advent of OpenAI, ChatGPT-4 recently raised concerns over the ill effects of technology. According to OpenAI, GPT-4 exhibits “human-level performance” on various professional and academic benchmarks, passing a simulated bar exam with a score in the top 10 percent of test takers. It became clear that almost any job that doesn’t require physical presence could soon be substantially automated and done through generative AI. In fact, a recent report by Goldman Sachs estimates that as many as 300 million full-time jobs around the world could be automated in some way by the newest wave of artificial intelligence.

While such fearmongering continues to make circles, the fact remains that just like any other technology, Robotics and Artificial Intelligence are meant only to serve humankind.

Will Technology Cause An Unemployment Crisis?

The idea that technology destroys jobs and will cause massive unemployment prevails despite history demonstrating otherwise. It’s a disproven myth. After all, if technology had been destroying jobs for the hundreds of years people have been arguing about automation and machines, there would be hardly any jobs left. This is of course not true. Bulldozers took the place of men with shovels. Cars put railroad workers out of business. Elevator operators, typists, blacksmiths, and manual telephone operators jobs all vanished over the 20th century.

Every new labor-saving device destroys jobs. But this is of great benefit to mankind. It frees labor for tasks that were impossible to accomplish previously! At the time of the founding of our nation, more than 95 percent of the labor force had to work on the farm to keep us fed; nowadays, less than 45 percent in India is so employed. Had we known that this would happen, should we have worried about the loss of jobs in agriculture? Should we have tried to stop the advances in technology that obliterated 50 percent of the jobs in existence at the time? On the contrary, it was the freeing of 50 percent of the labor force from farm work that allowed us to take the gigantic steps forward we have made in the past two centuries.

Also, the agricultural sector isn’t that promising. Whether we put 50% of our labor or 10% of our labor on food production, we would not be able to change how much our households spend on food or that we need plenty of things besides food. The contribution of agriculture to the Indian GDP is around 16%. When 50% of people share only 16% of income, there is poverty in farming by default. We are condemning them to low incomes. This is why we have to get a majority of our farmers out of agriculture and have them be used in sectors where people actually spend money. That is the only way to get them out of poverty and technological advancements provide those new sectors where the labor force can be used.

In his book, Economy in One Lesson, Henry Hazlitt discussed the issue of technology and machines displacing humans and causing mass unemployment. In the chapter titled “The Curse of Machinery” of Economy in One Lesson, Hazlitt first asserts that if machines create unemployment, it follows that every technological innovation to this day has done so by improving the manufacturing process, gradually displacing jobs. This logic would lead to the conclusion that to achieve maximum employment, all the technological progression of the past millennia would have to be reversed.

While it may be true that in the short run, a machine may displace jobs upon being introduced to a sector, the creation of the machine itself would bring in new jobs. The economizing entrepreneur would only adopt the machine if he sees it as an integral component in expanding his profits. These new profits could be used for expanding his operations, or his own personal consumption. If the former, the entrepreneur could invest in new machinery, in turn creating new jobs, and if the latter, money spent in any given industry would lead to an increase in employment in that industry. Another point to consider is that goods produced in one industry could be used as capital in another industry. For example, a firm may use machines to create bolts at a faster rate. While this may lead to an initial decrease in the number of jobs in the bolt industry, it would lead to an increase in jobs in another industry. For example, car manufacturers may need to use these bolts, so they now have more capital to use in manufacturing cars. This would lead to an increase in the amount of jobs in the automotive industry.

Will AI Cause Social Inequality?

Another issue related to the development of AI is that it will cause income inequality. All the greedy capitalists will take advantage of the increased productivity of the automated techniques and fire all of their employees. Unemployment will rise as we run out of jobs for humans to do, they say.

This fear is also. First of all, how could these greedy capitalists make all their money without a large mass of consumers purchasing their products? If the majority of people are without income because of automation, then the majority of people won’t be able to help line the pockets of greedy capitalists. Second, there will always be jobs because there will always be scarcity. Human wants are unlimited, diverse, and ever-changing, yet the resources we need to satisfy our desires are limited. The production of any good requires labor and entrepreneurship, so humans will never become unnecessary.

Technology serves to make the economy stronger. Machines and tools make us more productive. The entire goal of economic progress is to make us more productive, and more efficient, have more consumer goods available, have more leisure time, and have higher standards of living. This is achieved by higher productivity and efficiency. We are better off not needing twelve people with shovels to do the same thing as a bulldozer.

The major issue with OpenAI is that it will reduce the jobs for writers, content producers, website designers and developers, programmers, and other technicians. Should we really worry about this? We should ask what happened to all of the VHS manufacturers, the landline phone manufacturers, and video store workers? What happened to the railroad workers or the typewriter makers and technicians? Labor is fluid and finds new work. Job Hopping is a reality. People learn new things and get new jobs. They do it constantly. Society creates and destroys different kinds of jobs through technology. Markets adjust and people will find new work, just as has been in the past. The prediction that technological advancement will be too rapid for us to adjust is a hollow, misguided forecast that lives on despite its losing record. Job displacement does occur and people must adjust. It is worth taking notice of this and knowing that people can use help when finding new jobs and new careers. However, technology should not be avoided and feared because it replaces currently existing jobs. It makes our lives better and leads to the liberation of labor for newer, better jobs. The next generation of technological development and automation won’t result in a joblessness crisis.

So this is it for today. We Will continue to discuss the Ethics of Liberty. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

Rip Van Winkle by Washington Irving | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. Washington Irving was an American short-story writer, essayist, and biographer who was born on April 3, 1783 and died on November 28, 1859. He began his literary career in 1802 under the pseudonym Jonathan Oldstyle and wrote some observational letters for a news magazine Morning Chronicle. As a biographer, he wrote biographies of Oliver Goldsmith, Muhammad, and George Washington. In 1815, he traveled to England for some family business and there he began writing essays and short stories that he published in a serialized manner under the title The Sketchbook of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent from 1819 to 1820. The Sketchbook of Geoffrey Crayon was a huge success in America and it was the first work by an American author to be reviewed well in Europe. Most of the sketches concern his observations as an American visiting England, but six, including the two most famous—“Rip Van Winkle” and “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” are short stories based in America. Both these stories are adaptations of German folklore retold with New York as the setting and a romantic defense of Native Americans. Rip Van Winkle is one of the most popular sketches or stories by Irving that tells the story of an indolent but good-natured Dutch-American from pre-Revolutionary War New York.

Characters of Rip Van Winkle:

Geoffrey Crayon is the narrator of the story. He is an avid traveler and is highly interested in the stories, people, and cultures of the past. Diedrich Knickerbocker was an old gentleman from New York who was especially interested in the histories, customs, and culture of the Dutch settlers in that state. He was known for his accuracy in historical matters. The account of Rip Van Winkle was found in his notes. Rip Van Winkle is a kind, good-natured, neighborly man who lived at the foot of the Catskills while the United States was still a colony of Britain. His ancestors were great soldiers but Rip is peaceful and indolent. He is a careless man who owns little farmland that he doesn’t tend well. Dame Van Winkle is his wife who continues to chide and berate him for being irresponsible and taking such poor care of the farm and being so idle. Derrick Van Bummel is the schoolmaster of Rip’s village. He becomes a celebrated general in the Revolutionary War and becomes a congressman. Nicholaus Vedder is the richest man and leader of Rip’s village. He owns an Inn in the village outside of which the village men gather to gossip. Peter Vanderdonk is the oldest person in Rip’s village and belongs to a family of historians. Everyone respects him and his approval of Rip’s story leads Rip to be reaccepted upon his late return.

Summary of Rip Van Winkle:

The story begins with an explanation that the account of Rip Van Winkle was found among the papers of a man named Diedrich Knickerbocker, an old gentleman from New York who was especially interested in the histories, customs, and culture of the Dutch settlers in that state. The narrator insists that Knickerbocker's greatest attribute is his accuracy and that the truth of the story is beyond any doubt. Rip Van Winkle lives in a small Dutch village along the Hudson River in the valley of the Catskill Mountains. Rip is a good-natured man descended from gallant soldiers but is a peaceful man himself, known for being a kind and gentle neighbor. Yet, he is careless about his family and is known to be a lazy and indolent person who doesn’t take good care of his little farmland. He is irresponsible towards his wife and children and his son who is also named Rip appears to be following his father’s footsteps. He also has a daughter and a pet dog named Wolf.

Rip often spends his time near the village inn where other men sit and chat about the issues of the day without much enthusiasm. It is a sort of philosophical or political club that meets on a bench outside the village inn. Derrick Van Bummel is the schoolmaster of the village who would often read newspapers and discuss current events with other people. Nicholas Vedder owns the inn and he is the most influential and rich person in the village. He doesn’t speak much but makes his opinions clear based on how he smokes his pipe. Rip Van Winkle is liked by this group of people but his wife Dame Van Winkle continues to berate them for having a bad influence over Rip.

Rip owns a little farmland that doesn’t offer much produce. He doesn’t care for the soil which is continuously depleting. Dame continues to shout at Rip trying to force him to be more responsible but he is indifferent.

One day, he goes into the wilderness with his dog to hunt squirrels. After a while, he decides to rest under a tree. While he is resting, he sees a strange man dressed in old-fashioned Dutch clothes, climbing the hill toward Rip and lugging a keg on his shoulder. The stranger asks for Rip’s help who gleefully helps him. The stranger invites him into a ravine into a hollow and he follows. In the hollow, Rip sees more strange-looking men who are playing nine pins, some old kind of ball game. The strange-looking men get startled by Rip’s presence but the stranger whom he accompanied tells them how Rip helped him. He then offers some drink to Rip from his keg and Rip drinks cheerfully. After more than a few drinks, he falls asleep.

When he wakes up in the morning, he is anxious about what Dame Van Winkle will say about his late return. He reaches for his gun but finds that it is now rusty and worm-eaten—perhaps the men tricked him and replaced his gun. Wolf also is gone and does not respond to Van Winkle’s calls. He gets up and feels quite stiff. When he tries to retrace his steps, the ravine appears to have become an impenetrable wall of rock, and some of the natural features of the area have changed.

He returns to his village but finds that people are wearing a different style of clothing than he is used to, and those who acknowledge him all seem to stroke their chins. When Rip checks his own chin, he finds that he has grown a foot-long grey beard. The children hoot at him and the dogs bark. The village itself has grown larger. He begins to think he must be going crazy, for the natural scenery is the only recognizable thing. The drink from the strangers must have made him lose his mind. Making his way to his house, he finds it in ruins as if nobody has been living there for years. His wife and children are absent. To find some familiar face, he visits the village inn but there is no inn now as it has been turned into The Union Hotel. The large tree that stood outside the inn has been cut down and a flagpost has replaced it. The flag post has an American flag and the poster on the hotel is not of King George but it is of General George Washington.

Seeing the strange-looking old man in old-fashioned clothes, the crowd gathers around Rip. The crowd asks him questions, especially about what political party he belongs to. He is confused and says he is still a loyal subject of the king. They declare him a traitor and a Tory. When he says he has just come looking for his friends, they tell him that Nicholaus Vedder has been dead for eighteen years and Van Bummel is now in Congress. It is also revealed that Nicholas Vedder has been dead for 18 years, indicating Rip has been gone for at least that long. Dismayed, Rip asks if anyone knows Rip Van Winkle. A few in the crowd point out a young man. When Rip looks at him, he finds him familiar and realizes that the young man is his son who was just a child when he went to the wilderness.

A familiar-looking woman appears from the crowd and Rip realizes that she is his daughter. The woman that her father went out with his gun one day twenty years ago and was never heard from since. Rip Van Winkle tells everyone that for him it has only been one night, which makes them think he is crazy. Rip asks about his wife and learns that Dame Van Winkle has passed away. While nobody believes him, Rip insists that he is Rip Van Winkle, the father of that woman. An older woman from the crowd suggests that they should consult Peter Vanderdonk, the oldest and wisest man in the village to verify the veracity of this strange man. Vanderdonk vouches for Rip Van Winkle and says that he has heard tales passed down about the ghosts of Hendrick Hudson and his men appearing once every twenty years; they play bowl and keep a guardian eye on the region that Hudson explored. Finally, the villagers accept Rip’s version and her daughter takes him to her house. He finds that she is married to a wealthy cheerful farmer. Rip eventually learns about the Revolutionary War and everything else that has passed. He continues to spend his time idly and now when he is old, nobody objects to him. Furthermore, since Dame is no more, there is nobody to berate Rip anymore.

The narrator Diedrich Knickerbocker ends the story by vouching for the veracity of the story on personal examination.

The story’s time setting is central: Rip Van Winkle goes to sleep before 1776 when the American colonies are still ruled by the British and wake up after the American War of Independence, which has succeeded in shaking off the British yoke and creating the independent nation of the United States of America.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of American English Literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

The Ethics of Bribery | A PoV Over Delhi Liquor Scam

The Ethics of Bribery | A PoV Over Delhi Liquor Scam

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. In 2011-12, India witnessed an anti-corruption movement led by Anna Hazare that was named ‘India Against Corruption.’ The other major leader of that group was the Magsaysay Award winner Arvind Kejriwal. Their main contention was the increasing corruption in the Indian government and political system and they wished to bring an Anti-Corruption Act called Jan Lokpal Bill to curb the menace of bribery and corruption.

The general public hardly knew if any such bill could curb corruption, and they hardly knew if the leaders of IAC really wished to fight against corruption, yet the IAC platform gave them a sense of hope, and the majority of the Indian public supported IAC without thinking about what is bribery, what corruption is, how it takes its roots, how it develops and can it be curbed?

Despite his promises and vows never to join politics, Arvind Kejriwal made a political party, fought and won elections and currently, he is the ruling Chief Minister of Delhi. The tides have turned and now, almost every major face of the Aam Admi Party, including Manish Sisodia, the former Deputy Chief Minister, Satyendar Kumar Jain, Sanjay Singh, and Arvind Kejriwal himself are facing corruption charges. Manish Sisodia, Satyendar Jain, and Sanjay Singh are already in jail and it won’t be a surprise if Arvind Kejriwal too finds his way to jail on the charges of corruption.

Allegations against AAP Leaders:

All the major AAP leaders are facing charges of corruption, bribery, and money laundering. Sateyndar Jain was arrested in May last year in a money laundering case. The Enforcement Directorate had arrested the AAP leader on the charge of laundering money through four companies allegedly linked to him. The case is based on a CBI complaint registered on the allegation that Satyendar Jain had acquired movable properties in the name of various persons from February 14, 2015, to May 31, 2017, which he could not satisfactorily account for.

The CBI on February 26, 2023, arrested Manish Sisodia, then the deputy chief minister of Delhi, for alleged corruption in the formulation and implementation of the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22. He has been in custody since then. According to the federal investigative agencies, irregularities were committed while modifying the excise policy, and undue favors were extended to license holders. Recently, Sanjay Singh was also arrested in connection with the Delhi excise policy-linked money laundering case.

Arvind Kejriwal continues to say that he and his party members are the most honest politicians and he even says that the most corrupt politician in India is Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself. Arvind Kejriwal alleges that all these cases of corruption, bribery, and money laundering against his fellow party members are because of political witch-hunting.

It may be true. It may be the case that the current central government is ignoring some other corruption issues while emphasizing the corruption involving the AAP Delhi government and other state governments of opposing parties. Yet, what can not be true is that these alleged corrupt leaders are honest. There is ample evidence that suggests that Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh took bribes in money in exchange for changing certain legalities to favor particular liquor producers and distributors. In addition, many such liquor producers and distributors have also been arrested and some of them have turned out to be the ED witnesses against the AAP Leaders.

Is Bribery a Crime?

Bribery is the act of giving or receiving something of value in exchange for some kind of influence or action in return, that the recipient would otherwise not offer.
Murray N. Rothbard explained the issue of Bribery in his book The Ethics of Liberty which was published in 1982. Suppose M. X wants to sell his products to Company Y. In order to gain the contract, Mr. X pays a bribe to Mr. Z who is the purchasing agent of Company Y. So whatever his supposed profit through this contract would be, he has given a portion of that profit to Mr. Z as bribe. That is, he has reduced the margin of his own profit by some degree while offering it to Mr. Z. Now Mr. X could have offered his products to Company Y directly at a reduced price and thus getting the same profit that he will now get after bribing Mr. Z but in that case, there was no guarantee that Company Y will accept his proposal and buy his product. Now when he has bribed Mr. Y, he will get guaranteed reduced profits. As far as Mr.X is concerned, he simply lowered his price to the company Y, and thereby gained the contract.”

“The illicit action here is, instead, solely the behavior of Mr. Y, the taker of the bribe. Mr. Y’s employment contract with his employers implicitly requires him to purchase materials to the best of his ability in the interests of his company. Instead, he violated his contract with Company Y by not performing as their proper agent: because of the bribe he either bought from a firm that he would not have dealt with otherwise or he paid a higher price than he needed to have by the amount of his rebate. In either case, Mr. Y violated his contract and invaded the property rights of his employers.”

“In the case of bribes, therefore, there is nothing illegitimate about the briber, but there is much that is illegitimate about the bribee, the taker of the bribe. ... It is only the taker of a bribe who should be prosecuted. In contrast, left-liberals tend to hold the bribe-giver as somehow more reprehensible, as in some way "corrupting" the taker. In that way, they deny the free will and the responsibility of each individual for his own actions.”

In the cases of bribery, the Indian Penal Code considers both the briber and the bribee culprits and this is why not only the AAP leaders of the Delhi government but also the liquor license holders who bribed them were also arrested. However, it is not correct. In this case, Company Y is the general public of Delhi while the politicians holding the excise portfolio of Delhi (Manish Sisodia and his associates) are Mr. Z, the person employed by the public of Delhi to purchase materials to the best of his ability in the interests of the state or the public of Delhi. Manish Sisodia clearly broke the contract of trust that he vowed to have with the public of Delhi. We often call it the social contract and thus it is corruption, it is crime.

How Corruption Begins?

We live in a democratic country. The government here is ‘of the people, by the people, and for the people.’ The general citizen of India has a certain kind of influence over the government that he can exercise, the influence of Vote. Arvind Kejriwal bribed the general public to receive the votes, the 'influence' of citizens, by promising free electricity, free water, free education, free healthcare, and so on. These are products and services that are not naturally available. We do not drink untreated water, we use well-treated clarified water that takes money and resources. Electricity cannot be produced for free, nobody will agree to teach a student for no money in return, and no doctor will agree to treat a patient free of cost. Yet, the politicians promise that they will offer these freebies. Many times, they promise direct cash transfers in people’s accounts as help for economically backward people and so on. All these poll promises and freebies are nothing but bribes that politicians offer to the public to gain their favor and win elections. What it means is that any democracy that works on the idea of social welfare is inherently corrupt and hence, corruption in government is no big deal, rather it is expected.

Who is the Culprit?

Even then, every politician and every government claims that they are honest and will try everything possible to curb corruption, end bribery, and bring honesty in the political governing realms. Why do these politicians do so while they begin their political careers by means of corruption, offering bribes as freebies for the voters? It's all about the appearance of legitimacy of government institutions. Simply put, the activities of politicians and bureaucrats are considered to be legitimate as long as they comply with various laws, rules, and regulations which they themselves create. Thus, politicians say the act of bribing a public official, foreign or domestic, is illegal, according to the laws made by them.

Yet, they know that they cannot win elections without offering freebies, subsidies to particular groups of society, rebates to certain groups of tax-payers, free ration, free fertilizers, free electricity, free water supply, and so on. No amount of political obfuscation can change the nature of these activities. This is bribery, in the purest sense of the word, and politicians are the bribe-givers!

However, as mentioned above, it is not the bribe-giver but the bribe-taker who breaks the contract and commits a crime. As a voter, each citizen has a contract with the democracy to choose the best, most honest person to hold the post of power. But the voters often forget their contract and their duty, they vote for the person who will provide maximum freebies, more free electricity, more rebates, and more doleouts. What they do not understand is that the politicians or the government aren’t going to give anything free at the expense of their own pockets. Rather, the politicians, or the government, robs a section of society by offering a little of the robbed money to other sections as freebies, while it enjoys the remaining. The government acts as the monkey while creating a tussle between the different sections of the society divided on the basis of religion, caste, class, and so on. Government discriminates, government bribes, yet, it is all legal. If the same things are done by an individual, they become illegal. If a politician offers cash for votes, it is a crime, but if the same politician offers a free ration, free electricity, and free grains if he wins, it becomes legal.

Politicians benefit from legal bribes which cause tremendous harm to the economic welfare of the general public, while condemning illegal bribes which are far less harmful to the general public.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the ethics of liberty. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

Brahma by Ralph Waldo Emerson | Structure, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. ‘Brahma’ is the title of one of the best poems written by Ralph Waldo Emerson that was published in 1857. The poem and the title of the poem are inspired by Eastern Indian philosophies. Emerson made notes from Vishnu Purana, Kathopanishada, Bhagavat Geeta, and other Upanishads in his notebook and that inspired him to write this poem.

The central speaker of the poem is Brahma Himself who, according to the Hindu texts, is the Creator of all things in the universe, part of the trinity with Vishnu (the protector) and Shiva (the destroyer). Brahma is regarded as the essence or ‘soul’ of the universe that Emerson called the ‘Oversoul’. The theme of the poem is that human beings can exalt their spiritual realm only through the realization of the Brahman, the Oversoul.

Structure and Theme of Brahma by Emerson:

This poem consists of 4 stanzas. Each 4-line stanza constitutes a quatrain with some kind of metrical and rhyme pattern. As the rhyme scheme of each stanza is ABAB, it is called an alternate or interlaced quatrain. The poem exhibits Transcendentalism with major themes of Man’s inherent goodness, unity with the universe, and man’s central status in the world are three major thematic strands of “Brahma.” Emerson argues about man’s unity in the universe in that he is the slayer, the slain, and the one who slays. In this way, he lives in everything, whether it is a god, a natural element, or even an abstract idea such as “the doubt” or “the good.” This also shows man’s inherent goodness as well as man’s central position in the scheme of this world. Whenever a person needs direction to do good, he must turn to a man and not heaven. Even the heavenly entities represented by gods lie deep in the heart of the man who does not need any intermediary to reach these deities.

Summary of Brahma by Emerson:

Stanza 1

“If the red slayer think he slays,
Or if the slain think he is slain,
They know not well the subtle ways
I keep, and pass, and turn again.”

The poem begins in first person as the speaker, Brahma Himself, explains that people are wrong about their assumptions. The speaker is the voice of one who has reached the pinnacle of spiritual illumination. The red slayer is Shiva, the destroyer, who destroys the body, not the soul. The speaker says that all those who are afraid of death are ignorant of the ‘subtle ways ’ of the Creator, the Oversoul because all those who are living are just me, and all those who die are also just me, as I the creator continue to turn again. The ‘subtle ways’ represent the circle of birth, growth, death, and rebirth. Brahma says that there is no difference between Brahma and Shiva, as both are the manifestation of the same Oversoul.

The first stanza is inspired by the Bhagavad Gita. “Anyone who thinks the soul is the slayer and anyone who thinks the soul is the slain both of them is in ignorance; the soul never slays nor slain; The soul never takes birth and never dies at any time nor does it come into being again when the body is created. The soul is birthless, eternal, imperishable, and timeless and is never destroyed when the body is destroyed; One who knows the soul as eternal, unborn, undeteriorating, and indestructible; how does that person cause death to anyone and whom does he slay?”(19, 20, 21. Chapter 2 of Bhagavad-Gita ).

Stanza 2

“Far or forgot to me is near;
Shadow and sunlight are the same;
The vanished gods to me appear;
And one to me are shame and fame”

In the second stanza, the poet uses contrasting images and metaphors suggesting the Western idea of binary opposition, “either this or that,” which suggests empirical thinking. It is a way of discriminating between antagonistic and incomparable things, shadows to sunlight, and far to near. However, Emerson refutes this concept of binary opposition and suggests that all these differences are illusionary (Maya). On the Transcendental level, both of these opposites represent different sides of the same coin. One man’s justice is another’s injustice; one man’s beauty, another’s ugliness; one man’s wisdom, another’s folly; as one beholds the same objects from a higher point. Often men fail to realize the oneness while observing these supposed binary opposites because of their cognitive limitations. According to Emerson, if a man reaches the height of the Oversoul or God, or becomes one with the Oversoul or God, everything is essentially the same.

Stanza 3

“They reckon ill who leave me out;
When me they fly, I am the wings;
I am the doubter and the doubt,
And I the hymn the Brahmin sings.”

In the third stanza, the poet further explains the nature of Brahma. Brahma expresses his satisfaction with those who realize their mistake in ignoring the presence of Oversoul and mend their ways. Emerson expresses the idea of another shloka from Bhagavad Gita “For one who sees Me everywhere and sees everything in Me, I am never forgotten by them and they are never forgotten by Me”(30, chapter 6 of Bhagavad-Gita). Emerson uses metaphors to express the totality of Brahma for those who realize the Oversoul and says that those who realize the presence of Oversoul within them, they get rid of all the illusions and binary oppositions as there remains no difference between the doubter and the doubt. Brahma says that he is the totality that those who know the Oversoul, the essence of the universe, praise in their hymns.

Stanza 4

“The strong gods pine for my abode,
And pine in vain the sacred Seven;
But thou, meek lover of the good!
Find me, and turn thy back on heaven.”

In the fourth stanza, the poet uses Allusions offering references to Hindu mythology. The strong gods refer to Devtas including Indra, the god of the sky, Agni, the god of fire, Yama, the god of death and judgment and others. These strong gods are like humans with special powers and were created by Brahma himself. Just like humans, these gods pine for salvation which is possible only if they integrate themselves into the Brahma, the Oversoul. Another allusion is ‘the sacred Seven’ which is a reference to the Seven Sages of Hindu Cosmology, the SaptaRishis. Despite all their knowledge, the ‘sacred Seven’ pine for salvation which again is possible only through the realization that they and everyone else are no different from the Oversoul. Thus, Brahma says that humans, who are the meek lover of the good’ and wishes pleasant things to experience, should give up their search for heaven and heavenly beauty, instead they should concentrate and realize the Oversoul within themselves because that is the only way to attain salvation.

Literary Devices used in Brahma:

Emerson has used Allusion in this poem with reference to Hindu cosmology mentioning the Sacred Seven, Brahmin, and strong gods. Assonance has been used in the beginning line of Stanza 1 and Stanza 2 ( the sound of /a/ in “If the red slayer think he slays” and the sound of /o/ in “Far or forgot to me is near.”) Alliteration has also been used as in ‘sacred Seven’ and the use of sound /f/ in “Far or forgot to me is near.” Consonance has also been used as the sound of /t and w/ in “They know not well the subtle ways.” Strong imagery is used throughout the poem along with some extensive metaphors (“I am the wings” and “I the hymn the Brahmin sings” to show that the poet claims to be a bird as well as a hymn.) The poet used parallelism, such as “When me they fly, I am the wings.” It has an equal number of words in both clauses.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of American English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

The Adventures of Peregrine Pickle by Tobias Smollett | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. The Adventures of Peregrine Pickle is a Picaresque novel by Tobias Smollett that was first published in 1751 and then republished in 1758. A Picaresque novel is an early form of novel with a first-person narrative, relating the adventures of a rogue or lowborn adventurer as he drifts from place to place and from one social scene to another in his effort to survive. The word Picaresque comes from Spanish Picaro which means a cynical rogue person. A Picaresque novel resembles medieval romances of chivalry but unlike the idealistic knight-errant hero of medieval chivalry, the Picaro is a cynical and amoral rascal who, if given half a chance, would rather live by his wits than by honorable work. A picaresque novel essentially involves satirical elements to highlight the ills of society.

The novel is a satire of human cruelty, stupidity, and greed. In addition, Smollett also caricatured many of his contemporaries and their works in this novel including author Henry Fielding and actor David Garrick. In addition, Smollett also satirized the medical profession while Smollett himself was a surgeon. The novel also contains a lengthy independent story called "The Memoirs of a Lady of Quality", written by Frances Vane, Viscountess Vane. This story follows the romantic adventures of an anonymous noblewoman. This narrative is in the amatory fiction genre and describes a series of love affairs the heroine has with a variety of titled men.

The novel inspired later novelists including Charles Dickens who based the character of Wemmick, the closed-off but secretly gentle assistant to the vicious lawyer Mr. Jaggers in Great Expectations, on Trunnion.

Characters of Peregrine Pickle:

Peregrine Pickle is a young troubled man who is rejected by his cruel mother, ignored by his indifferent father, and hated by his degenerate brother. He is adventurous, mischievous, highly selfish, and unwilling to acknowledge morality. Gamaliel Pickle is Peregrine’s father and Sally Appleby is his mother. Grizzle is Peregrine’s aunt, sister of Gamaliel. Commodore Hawser Trunnion is Peregrine’s uncle who adopts him and spoils him. Trunnion is a rich eccentric retired sea captain who treats and manages his house as a warship. Lieutenant Hatchway and Tom Pipes are Trunnion’s old crew members who live with Trunnion at his home. Emilia Gauntlet is a beautiful young heiress who falls in love with Peregrine. Godfrey Gauntlet is Emilia’s brother. He doesn’t like Perigrine and opposes Emilia’s relationship with him.

Summary of Peregrine Pickle:

Gamaliel Pickle is the son of a rich London merchant and inherits a huge fortune. However, Gamalial himself is no good at business. He decides to retire from business and live on the interest of his fortune rather than risk his principal in the uncertainties of trade. He lives with his sister Grizzle in a huge mansion and his neighbor is eccentric old seaman Commodore Hawser Trunnion. Gamalial picks the eyes of Sally Appleby who seduces him and marries him for his money. Sally soon becomes the dominating force in the house who abuses Gamalial and Grizzly. Sally takes such a dislike to Grizzle that she tries in every way possible to embarrass and humiliate her sister-in-law.

After some time, Sally becomes pregnant and gives birth to Peregrine Pickle, her first son. Sally naturally dislikes Peregrine and treats him the same way she treats Gamalial and Grizzle. Meanwhile, Grizzly realizes that she is no more needed in her brother’s house and tries to woo Trunnion. Trunnion is a rich old man who desires an heir. Trunnion lives with his two old mates Lieutenant Hatchway, a one-legged old veteran, and Tom Pipes. He is a misanthrope and misogynist. Yet, Grizzly succeeds in breaching his obstinacy and marries him. Being old, Trunnion desires an heir. Grizzly and Trunnion try to have a baby but Grizzly fails to become a mother. Trunnion observes that Peregrine is being ill-treated by his mother while his father Gamalial is indifferent and subservient to his wife. Trunnion grows a liking for Peregrine whom he finds smart and independent. When Sally gives birth to her second son, her behavior towards Peregrine becomes further cruel. The younger Pickle too despises Peregrine. Peregrine grows into a headstrong, rebellious boy who shows his high spirits in pranks that mortify and irritate his parents. He is sent away to school, and he rebels against his foolish and hypocritical teachers; at last, he writes to the Commodore to request removal from the school. The Commodore feels pity for the boy and admires his spirit of independence, so he takes him out of school and adopts him as his son and heir.

Trunnion indulges Peregrine’s every whim and spoils him in all possible ways and he turns out to be a spoiled rich brat which means that Peregrine can do whatever he wants with no repercussions. He often indulges in playing cruel pranks on those around him. He makes up some friends who encourage him in his misadventures. One day, Peregrine and his friends steal a peasant’s fruit and then beat the man to death when he objects, laughing to realize that now his family will have to become beggars. Trunnian realizes that he cannot continue to bear Peregrine’s pranks and escapades and thus, he decides to send him to Winchester School. Tom Pipes accompanies him as a guardian. At Winchester School, Peregrine meets Emilia Gauntlet, a young heiress of a rich family. He falls in love with her and this changes his behavior as he grows serious towards his studies. However, Emilia’s brother Godfrey Gauntlet doesn’t like Perigrine and he opposes Emilia being friendly with him. In one instance Godfrey and Perigrine indulge in an angry debate and Godfrey challenges him for a duel. Perigrine tries to shy away but Godfrey insists. First Godfrey proposes a fight with swords but then he offers a fight with pistols if Perigrine is comfortable with that. Perigrine declines using pistols and they fight with swords. In the end, the swords of both of them get broken without hurting anyone of them seriously, yet, the argument between the two persists.

After his school, Trunnian sends Peregrine to Oxford for higher studies. Peregrine continues his pranks at the University too. After graduating, Peregrine travels around Europe and Turrian funds his Grand Tour. Peregrine especially likes Paris and spends a lot of time there where chases women, overindulges in alcohol, and participates in a variety of pranks.

He meets an English painter in Paris who is facing a charge and has been sent to the Bastille for some trifling offense and is about to be released, Peregrine and his friends, playing on his ignorance of the language, let him think he has been sentenced to be broken on a wheel. A little later they tell him that his punishment has been commuted to castration.

After spending enough time on his tour, he returns to England and continues his pranks while living as a con man. In London, he siphons money from wealthy high-society people with the help of a fake magician who pretends to read fortunes. Later, in the resort town of Bath, he pretends to be a doctor while cheating common people. He continues his romance with Emilia and at this point, Tobias Smollett added an independent story titled “The Memoirs of a Lady of Quality,” written by the memoirist Frances Vane, Viscountess Vane, this is an independent story that follows the romantic adventures of an anonymous noblewoman. This narrative is in the amatory fiction genre and describes a series of love affairs the heroine has with a variety of titled men. This story has nothing to do with Peregrine or Emilia.

When Tobias returns to Peregrine, we learn that he continues his pranks as a con man but his fortune turns and out of greed, his own friends swindle away all his money. After losing all of his money, he falls into debt and since he cannot pay his debt, he is imprisoned in the Fleet debtor's prison. During his time in prison, he gets some time for introspection and it appears as if he is repenting. However, he fails to find a way out of the prison. His fortune turns again as his father Gamaliel Pickle dies away and he suddenly and unexpectedly inherits 80,000 pounds. Peregrine repents his terrible behavior and promises to live the rest of his life in a less destructive and antisocial way. He promises to be an honest and morally sound citizen. His changed behavior helps him in marrying Emilia.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

The Adventures of Roderick Random by Tobias Smollett | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. Tobias Smollett was a British Scottish surgeon, writer, novelist, and playwright. He was born in 1721 and died in 1771. He is known for his picaresque novels including The Adventures of Roderick Random (1748), The Adventures of Peregrine Pickel (1751), and The Expedition of Humphry Clinker (1771).

The Picaresque novel is a genre of prose fiction that depicts the adventures of a roguish but "appealing hero", usually of low social class, who lives by his wits in a corrupt society. It is a genre that doesn’t use a continuous plot line, but instead strings together various adventures or episodes from the life of its protagonist to satirize or illuminate something about the surrounding culture. What this often means is that the protagonist doesn’t evolve or progress along an arc, the way we now expect novel characters to do. Rather, the character stumbles from scene to scene unchanged, mostly as a way for the author to display, satirize, and mock the ins and outs of different kinds of social circles, power structures, or cultural morals or ethics.

The Adventures of Roderick Random was Tobias Smollett’s first novel which was published in 1748. It is loosely based on Smollett’s experiences in the British Navy in 1741 and thus, it is often termed a semi-autobiographical work.

Characters of Roderick Random:

Roderick Random is the titular character of the novel who is the son of a Scottish gentleman and a low-class woman. He is the narrator of the story and he is nicknamed as Rory. His father abandons him at an early age. Hugh Strap is a friend of Rory. He is a common innocent man, an apprentice of a barber. Hugh and Roderick used to study at the same school during their childhood. During his visit to France, Hugh Strap adopts a new name "Monsieur d'Estrapes." Narcissa is a gentlewoman belonging to a rich noble family. She falls in love with Roderick but her squire brother opposes their relationship. Tom Bowling is a cousin of Roderick’s dead mother and maternal uncle of Roderick. He is a sailor who tries to support and help Roderick from time to time. Captain Oakum is the captain of the ship Thunder that Roderick joins as a surgeon’s mate. Oakum hates Roderick and abuses him.

Summary of Roderick Random:

The story is narrated by Roderick himself. His father was a Scottish gentleman who fell in love with a poor low-class girl from England and married her. His father’s high-class family is ashamed of the son’s marriage to a woman from low society and subsequently shuns Roderick’s parents. His father dutifully helps his wife and soon she gives birth to their son Roderick Random. However, his mother dies soon after giving birth to him leaving his father overwhelmed by grief. Lost and with no family left to financially support him, Roderick’s father flees and abandons his only son.
Roderick is an orphan now as his paternal grandfather refuses to take the child into his custody. Yet, his paternal grandfather offers him the minimal amount of support necessary. The grandfather secures Roderick a free education at a local school in Scotland in an attempt to uphold the family’s nobility.

Roderick is a brilliant student at school who excels in all subjects but is badly treated by his teachers, tutors, and schoolmasters who abuse him because his mother belonged to the lower class. Instead of helping him, his tutor tries to discourage him in his studies yet, Roderick learns Latin, French, Greek, and Italian. He becomes popular among his peers yet his school masters continue to abuse him as a whipping boy and a punishment model, even when he’s done nothing wrong. He grows a close friendship with Hugh Strap. His tutor hates him and doesn’t stop until he gets Roderick expelled from the school. Soon he learns about the death of his grandfather and he is left to take care of himself.

Even in such a dire situation, he gets support from his maternal uncle Tom Bowling but since Thomas Bowling is a sailor in the Navy, he is unable to remain present with Roderick. He ensures that Roderick’s education continues and arranges for his admission to a university. After some years, Tom Bowling gets expelled from the Navy and then he fails to help Roderick monetarily.

Roderick has grown up quite smart by this time and uses his wit, intelligence, and charm to survive. Soon he begins a series of international journeys to experience different types of people and their lifestyles from all social classes. He visits Bath, France, West Africa, and the West Indies. Being poor with no support, he continues to suffer malice and discrimination. On his return, he reaches London but doesn’t like the city as he finds it incredibly dirty and ridden with crime. Yet, he gets a job as an apprentice to a surgeon and soon he impresses his surgeon master so much that the surgeon recommends his name to be his assistant in the Navy.

Roderick continues to meet different people from the high class. He begins working for a chemist who introduces him to Miss Williams who seems to be impressive and rich. Roderick falls for her and tries to woo her but soon learns that she is a prostitute seeking a more comfortable life. This discourages Roderick as he is seeking a wealthy woman who will finally afford him security. Despite all his wits and charm, Roderick is still naive and whatever little money he earns as the apprentice of the surgeon and the chemist, is robbed away by swindlers and sharpers.

Now when he again is penniless, he gets abducted by the sea pirates owning the ship Thunder. When they learn that Roderick is a recommended surgeon apprentice, they force him to join the crew. He joins a ship Thunder on their journey to Jamaica as a surgeon’s mate, but the trip is terrible as they encounter bad weather. Furthermore, the commanding officer Captain Oakum despises him. One day, Captain Oakum overhears Roderick and another surgeon’s mate criticizing him and gets enraged. The Captain punishes Roderick brutally and tries to hang him. When other crew members interrupt, he says that he believes Roderick is a spy as he has notes written in Greek in his notebook. The other crew members somehow manage to cool down the Captain’s temper and Roderick survives. Somehow the ship Thunder reaches an island where Roderick leaves the ship. Soon he finds another Lizard vessel on the return journey to England. On the ship Lizard, Roderick meets Hugh Strap again who is returning from his visit to France. Roderick gets relief after seeing a friend after so many days. Furthermore, the captain of the ship Lizard too likes Roderick. Hugh informs him that he made good money in France and he even changed his name to Monsieur d’Estrapes. The captain of the ship is old and he dies during the journey and then Lieutenant Crampley takes control of the ship. He, too, hates Roderick, and once the ship arrives in England, the crew beats and robs him. An old lady was watching all this from a distance and when the crew goes away leaving Roderick in the dirt, she visits him and helps him. She informs him that her name is Mrs. Sagely. Roderick asks her to help him in getting a job and she introduces him to a rich family looking for a helping man, Roderick meets Narcissa, the young girl belonging to that rich family and soon falls in love with her. He woos Narcissa with his wit and charm and she too starts liking him. However, her elder brother, who is a squire is opposed to her relationship with Roderick who is a poor low-class man.

Suddenly, Roderick learns the whereabouts of his estranged father who went to Argentina after abandoning him and made a huge fortune. His father meets him gleefully but they fail to warm up their relationship because of the ill memories of the past. Yet, Roderick gets a good amount of money from his father as an inheritance which enables him to have a secure, comfortable life. With the help of his newly acquired wealth, he manages to marry Narcissa without her brother’s consent.

Analysis of Roderick Random:

Smollett portrayed a vicious cycle of hypocrisy, greed, deceit, and snobbery in this novel which was common in England during that period. He used this novel to expose the brutality, incompetence, and injustice of the Royal Navy of England at the Battle of Cartagena in 1741 when he was a part of the Navy. In addition, he raised issues of privateering, slavery, prostitution, the dowry system, the inhumanity of debtor’s prisons, homosexuality, and corruption in political and art circles and in the area of medicine.

Tobias Smollett is often considered the pioneer of Picaresque novels whose style impressed and influenced later novelists including Dickens, Melville, and Thackeray.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!