Usman Academy of English

Tips for English Lectureship or Suject Specialist Exam.

https://youtu.be/WearfxRfOxE

Tips for English Lectureship or Suject Specialist Exam. how to start English lectureship preparation. English lecturer tips. English lecturer

PROFNAEEM – Learn English with Prof.Naeeem

The R**e of the Lock - A mock-epic

Heroic or Epic poems, according to Maynard Meck, are poems like the Odyssey, the Aeneid, and Paradise Lost dealing with man in his exalted aspects. Their action is weighty, their personages are dignified and their style is elevated.

The Iliad, for example, deals with the tough and prolonged battle between the Greek and the Trojan Heroes, while the Odyssey describes the adventures of Odysseus, one of the Greek kings in the war of Troy. Similarly, Virgil’s Aeneid deals with the adventures of Aeneas and ends with the hero’s finding his divinely ordained destiny as the founder of the Roman Empire. Milton Paradise Lost represents the fall of the rebellious angles from Paradise and justifies the ways of God to man. In all the epics, gods and daemons, take active part in human affairs and guide the destiny of their chosen participants. The mock-epic is a poetic form which uses the epic structure but on a miniature scale and has a subject that is mean and trivial. The purpose of the mock-epic or mock-heroic poem is satirical. The writer makes the subject look ridiculous by placing it in a framework entirely inappropriate to its importance. Pope’s description of the R**e of the Lock as a mock-heroic poem misled some readers into thinking that the comic attack was intended against heroic-poetry. In fact, a mock-heroic poem is not a satire on poetry itself, but the target of the attack may be a person or persons, an institution or institutions or the whole society. The subject of such a poem is trivial or unimportant, but the treatment of the subject is heroic or epic and such exaggeration of the trivial naturally arouses laughter. The pleasure of the poem, as Ian Jack points out, ensues from “comparing small men to giants and making pygmies of them in the process”. A mock-epic parodies the epic in the sense of which Dr. Johnson described parody as “a kind of writing in which the word of an author or his thoughts are taken and by a light change are adapted to some new purpose.” Pope was fully conscious of his intentions to make The R**e of the Lock a mock-epic poem is evident from the title he has given it. Homer’s Iliad which describes the events arising out of Helen’s elopement with a Trojan prince, Paris and the subsequent war between the Greeks and the Trojans can be appropriately described as a poem dealing with the “R**e of Helen”. That is how the Greeks took this whole episode. The title of Pope’s poem, The R**e of the Lock is thus a parody of the Iliad in this sense; for in this poem, the mighty contest ensues from the r**e or assault on the lock of Belinda’s hair. The R**e of the Lock parodies the serious epics not only in it title but also in the overall structure. The poem is divided into five cantos like the five acts of a drama. At the beginning, there is a statement of purpose and invocation to the Muse as in a serious epic. Homer, for example, begins his Iliad thus: chilles’ wrath to Greece the direful spring Of woes unnumbered heavenly goddess sing Virgil declares in Aenied that “Of arms and man I sing” Milton starts his epic “Of man’s first disobedience to and to justify the ways of God to man” Pope imitate these conventions when he declares in his poem.

What dire offence from am’rous causes springs what mighty contests arise from trivial things I sing – this verse to Caryll Muse!

is due This ev’n Belinda may vouchsafe to view:

Slight is the subject, but not so the praise

If she inspire, and he approve my lays.

It is through these words that we understand that the beginning is like that of most epics. Subsequent events of the poem parody the epic structure in the similar way. The opening invocation, the description of the heroine’s toilet, the journey to Hampton Court , the game of ombre magnified into a pitched battle all lead up to the moment when the peer produces the fatal pair of scissors, but the action of the mortals was not enough. Pope knew that in true epics the affairs of men were aided or thwarted by the Heavenly Powers. He, therefore, added the bodies of the supernatural beings – sylphs, gnomes, nymphs and salamanders – as agents in the story. The gods of the epic are heroic beings, but pope’s deities are tiny. Pope describes the diminutive gods of the poem as “the light militia of the lower sky”. Belinda screams like the Homeric poems and dashed like the characters of the great epics, but she is a mere slip of a girl. This is the ironic contrast. We find a battle drawn to combat like the Greek warriors. But it is only a game of cards on a dressing table. We find a supernatural being who threatens his inferiors with torture. But it is a Sylph, not Jove. The poem contains parodies of Homer, Virgil, Ariosto, Spenser and Milton as well as reminiscences of Catallus, Ovid and the Bible. There are several instances of Burlesque-treatment. There is Belinda’s voyage to Hampton Court which suggests the voyage of Aeneas up to the Tiber in Virgil. There is a coffee party which is a parody of the meals frequency described in Homer. The combat at the end recalls the fighting which is found anywhere in the ancient epics. The Cave of Spleen is a parody of an allegorical picture, examples of which may be found in poets like Spenser. Just before the cutting of the lock, when Ariel searches out the close recess of the virgin’s thoughts. There he finds an earthly lover lurking in her heart, and Pope tells us that Ariel retires with a sigh, resigned to fate. This situation echoes the moment in Paradise Lost when after the fall of Adam and Eve, the Angles of God retire mute and sad to heaven. The angles could have protected Adam and Even against Satan, but man’s own free choice of will they are as helpless as Ariel and his comrades are in the face of Belinda’s free choice of earthly lover. An outstanding mock-heroic in the poem is the comparison between arming of an epic hero and Belinda’s dressing herself and using cosmetics in order to kill. Pope describes a society-lady in terms that would suit the arming of a warrior like Achilles. The R**e of the Lock is a poem ridiculing the fashionable world of Pope’s day. But there are several occasions when we feel that the epic world of homer and Virgil has in this poem been scaled down, wittily and affectionately, to admit the coffee-table and the fashionable lady’s bed-chamber.

Supernatural Machinery: In all epics, god and daemons, whether pagan or Christian, participate in the action side by side with the human agents. In an epic poem, as Le Bossu had emphasized, “the machine crowns the whole work” Pope, therefore, gives a mock dignity to the action of the R**e of the Lock by the use of machinery of sylphs and gnomes. Taken from the Rosicrucian cult, which Bayle had described as the “sect of mountebanks”, the sylphs and gnomes reduce the divine and demonic agents of an epic poem to their diminutive status. Unlike the deities of the epics, who act guardian agents of the epic heroes, Belinda’s guardian sylph, Ariel is an ineffectual/airy being who deserts her at the most critical moment. The supernatural machinery of the poem thus provides a gentle mockery of the epic deities and increases the charm of the poem as a mock-heroic.

The Epic Style: Within this framework, The R**e of the Lock contains many allusions to Homer, Virgil, Milton and Shakespeare. Ariel’s description of the metamorphosis of a prudish woman into a sylph –

Her joy in gilded chariots, when alive

And love of Ombre, after death survive –

is a direct parody of Aeneid in Dryden’s translation;

The love of horses which they had, alive,

And care of chariots, after death survive.

Though the subject-matter of the R**e of the Lock is trivial and ridiculous, the style, diction and versification are rarely so. The diction is exalted throughout, the heroic-couplets are carefully polished and chiseled and the classical device of periphrasis is frequently resorted to. The very opening line of The R**e of the Lock – What dire/my lays could very well open a serious epic. At the end of Canto II, one notices a similar elevation of style:

What time would spare, from steel receives it dates And moments like men submit to fate!

Steel cou’d the labour of the gods destroy,

And strike to dust the’ imperial tow’rs of Troy

The rhetoric style is the same that occurs in epic poetry. The Mock-heroic effect is produced by the context which emphasizes that the invincible “steel” referred to here is the steel of the pair of scissors with which the Baron cuts off Belinda’s lock.

But when to mischief mortals bend their will,

How soon they find fit instruments of ill!

Just ‘hen, Clarissa drew with tempting grace

A two-edged weapon from her shining case.

The use of the periphrases – “two-edged weapon”, “glittering Forfex” and the fatal engine for a tiny pair of scissors.

Collateral of the Great with the Little: A mock-epic or mock-heroic in the Augustan sense of the term in itself is an example of the collation of the great with the little. In the R**e of the Lock, Pope frequently juxtaposes the heroic with the trivial to produce the mock-epic effect. The very opening couplet juxtaposes “Mighty contest” with trivial things”. Elsewhere, Pope achieves this effect by reducing the great to the level of the trivial.

Whether the nymph shall break Diana’s law,

Or some frail China jar receive a flaw,

Or stain her honour, or hew brocade,

Forget her prayers, or miss a masquerade,

Or lose her heart, or a necklace, at a ball;

Or whether Heaven has doom’d that

Shock must fall.

In these three couplets, chastity is equated with ‘frail China jar’ honor with new brocade, rayer with a masquerade, heart with a necklace. The effect of this collation is highly amusing and startling. The confusion of values which informs Belinda’s world could not have been presented in a way better than this juxtaposing of the great with the little.

Conclusion: All these devices make The R**e of the Lock a highly subtle and complex mock-epic. Dryden’s Mac Flecknoe appears rather simple and straightforward when compared with Pope’s poem. In the R**e of the Lock, however, satire is mixed with genuine charm which surrounds Belinda, Is central figure. Pope does not deny the charm and glamour and the artificial world she presides over. In her barge over Thames, she is genuinely fascinated fascinating and remains so in the rest of the poem. It is only when one notices that this brilliance and gaiety are at the expense of something much more important that they appear to be trivial and hollow. Belinda’s description in the second Canto is both a genuine admiration for her beauty and charm and a mild criticism of her pride and coquetry.

On her white breast a sparking cross she wore,

Which Jews might kiss, and infidels adore.

Favors to none, to all she smiles extends;

Oft she rejects, but never once offends.

Bright as the sun, her eyes the gazers strike,

And like the sun, they shine on all alike.

The R**e of the Lock is a nearly perfect example of its genre, the genre of the mock-epic not only because it parodies the epic conventions and devices throughout, but also because it provides a highly amusing drama of its own rights. The greatness of the poem is due to Pope’s genius as well as to the care and pains he took in a different form. The balance between the concealed irony and the assumed gravity is as nicely trimmed as the balance of power in Europe. The little is made great and the great little. You hardly know whether to laugh or weep. It is the triumph of insignificance of foppery and folly. It is the perfection of the mock-heroic.

PROFNAEEM – Learn English with Prof.Naeeem Learn to Write and Speak I am Muhammad Naeem (Language Coach and Trainer). I help people improve their language skills. I love language because words create experience and experience makes the change. Language defines our present, past, and future. Language is the most powerful tool to break the sta...

Modern Literature (1900-1961)
The Modern Age in English Literature started from the beginning of the twentieth century, and it followed the Victorian Age. The most important characteristic of Modern Literature is that it is opposed to the general attitude to life and its problems adopted by the Victorian writers and the public, which may be termed ‘Victorian’. The young people during the fist decade of the present century regarded the Victorian age as hypocritical, and the Victorian ideals as mean, superficial and stupid.

This rebellious mood affected modern literature, which was directed by mental attitudes moral ideals and spiritual values diametrically opposed to those of the Victorians. Nothing was considered as certain; everything was questioned. In the field of literary technique also some fundamental changes took place. Standards of artistic workmanship and of aesthetic appreciations also underwent radical changes.
What the Victorians had considered as honourable and beautiful, their children and grandchildren considered as mean and ugly. The Victorians accepted the Voice of Authority, and acknowledged the rule of the Expert in religion, in politics, in literature and family life. They had the innate desire to affirm and confirm rather than to reject or question the opinions of the experts in their respective fields. They showed readiness to accept their words at face value without critical examinations. This was their attitude to religion and science. They believed in the truths revealed in the Bible, and accepted the new scientific theories as propounded by Darwin and others. On the other hand, the twentieth century minds did not take anything for granted; they questioned everything.
Another characteristic of Victorianism was an implicit faith in the permanence of nineteenth century institutions, both secular and spiritual. The Victorians believed that their family life, their Constitution, the British Empire and the Christian religion were based on sound footings, and that they would last for ever. This Victorian idea of the Permanence of Institutions was replaced among the early twentieth century writers by the sense that nothing is fixed and final in this world. H. G. Wells spoke of the flow of things and of “all this world of ours being no more than the prelude to the real civilisation”. The simple faith of the Victorians was replaced by the modern man’s desire to prob and question, Bernard Shaw, foremost among the rebels, attacked not only the ‘old’ superstitions of religion, but also the ‘new’ superstitions of science. The watchwords of his creed were: Question! Examine! Test! He challenged the Voice of Authority and the rule of the Expert. He was responsible for producing the interrogative habit of the mind in all spheres of life. He made the people question the basic conceptions of religion and morality. Andrew Undershift declares in Bernard Shaw’s Major Barbara: “That is what is wrong with the world at present. It scraps its obsolete steam engines and dynamos; but it won’t scrap its old prejudices and its old moralities and its old religions and its old political institutions”. Such a radical proclamation invigorated some whereas others were completely shaken, as Barbara herself: “I stood on the rock I thought eternal; and without a word it reeled and crumbled under me.”
The modern mind was outraged by the Victorian self-complacency. The social and religious reformers at first raised this complaint, and they were followed by men of letters, because they echo the voice around them. Of course, the accusation of self-complacency cannot be rightly levelled against many of the Victorian writers, especially the authors of Vanity Fair, David Copperfield, Maud, Past and Present, Bishop Blouhram, Culture and Anarchy, Richard Feveral and Tess. But there was felt the need of a change in the sphere of literature also because the idiom, the manner of presentment, the play of imagination, and the rhythm and structure of the verse, of the Victorian writers were becoming stale, and seemed gradually to be losing the old magic. Their words failed to evoke the spirit.
Thus a reaction was even otherwise overdue in the field of literature, because art has to be renewed in order to revitalise it. The Victorian literature had lost its freshness and it lacked in the element of surprise which is its very soul. It had relapsed into life of the common day, and could not give the reader a shock of novelty. At the end of the Victorian era it was felt that the ideas, experiences, moods and attitudes had changed, and so the freshness which was lacking in literature had to be supplied on another level.
Besides the modern reaction against the attitude of self-complacency of the Victorians, there was also failure or disintegration of values in the twentieth century. The young men who were being taught by their elders to prize ‘the things of the spirit’ above worldly prosperity, found in actual experience that nothing could be attained without money. Material prosperity had become the basis of social standing. Whereas in 1777 Dr. Johnson affirmed that ‘opulence excludes but one evil Poverty’, in 1863, Samuel Butler who was much ahead of his time, voiced the experience of the twentieth century, when he wrote: “Money is like antennae; without it the human insect loses touch with its environment. He who would acquire scholarship or gentility must first acquire cash. In order to make the best of himself, the average youth must first make money. He would have to sacrifice to possessiveness the qualities which should render possession worthwhile.”
Besides the immense importance which began to be attached to money in the twentieth century, there was also a more acute and pressing consciousness of the social life. Whereas some of the Victorians could satisfy themselves with the contemplation of cosmic order, identification with some Divine Intelligence or Superhuman plan which absorbs and purifies our petty egoisms, and with the merging of our will in a higher will, their successors in the twentieth century could not do so. They realised every day that man was more of a social being than a spiritual being, and that industrial problems were already menacing the peace of Europe. Instead of believing in the cult of self-perfection as the Victorians did, they were ready to accept the duty of working for others. A number of twentieth century writers began to study and ponder seriously over the writings of Karl Marx, Engels, Ruskin, Morris, and some of them like Henry James, discussed practical suggestions for the reconstruction of society.
The Victorians believed in the sanctity of home life, but in the twentieth century the sentiments for the family circle declined. Young men and women who realised the prospect of financial independence refused to submit to parental authority, and considered domestic life as too narrow. Moreover, young people who began early to earn their living got greater opportunity of mixing with each other, and to them s*x no longer remained a mystery. So love became much less of a romance and much more of an experience.
These are some of the examples of the disintegration of values in the twentieth century. The result was that the modern writers could no longer write in the old manner. If they played on such sentiments as the contempt for money, divine love, natural beauty, the sentiments of home and life, classical scholarship, and communication with the spirit of the past, they were running the risk of striking a false note. Even if they treated the same themes, they had to do it in a different manner, and evoke different thoughts and emotions from what were normally associated with them. The modern writer had, therefore, to cultivate a fresh point of view, and also a fresh technique.
The impact of scientific thought was mainly responsible for this attitude of interrogations and disintegration of old values. The scientific truths which were previously the proud possessions of the privileged few, were now equally intelligible to all. In an age of mass education, they began to appeal to the masses. The physical and biological conclusions of great scientists like Darwin, Lyell and Huxley, created the impression on the new generation that the universe looks like a colossal blunder, that human life on our inhospitable globe is an accident due to unknown causes, and that this accident had led to untold misery. They began to look upon Nature not as a system planned by Divine Architect, but as a powerful, but blind, pitiless and wasteful force. These impressions filled the people of the twentieth century with overwhelming pity, despair or stoicism. A number of writers bred and brought up in such an atmosphere began to voice these ideas in their writings.
The twentieth century has become the age of machine. Machinery has, no doubt, dominated every aspect of modern life, and it has produced mixed response from the readers and writers. Some of them have been alarmed at the materialism which machinery has brought in its wake, and they seek consolation and self-expression in the bygone unmechanised and pre-mechanical ages. Others, however, being impressed by the spectacle of mechanical power producing a sense of mathematical adjustment and simplicity of design, and conferring untold blessings on mankind, find a certain rhythm and beauty in it. But there is no doubt, that whereas machinery has reduced drudgery, accelerated production and raised the standard of living, it has given rise to several distressing complications. The various scientific appliances confer freedom and enslavement, efficiency and embarrassment. The modern man has now to live by the clock applying his energies not according to mood and impulse, but according to the time scheme. All these ideas are found expressed in modern literature, because the twentieth century author has to reflect this atmosphere, and he finds little help from the nineteenth century.
Another important factor which influenced modern literature was the large number of people of the poor classes who were educated by the State. In order to meet their demand for reading the publishers of the early twentieth century began whole series of cheaply reprinted classics. This was supplemented by the issue of anthologies of Victorian literature, which illustrated a stable society fit for a governing class which had established itself on the economic laws of wealth, the truth of Christianity and the legality of the English Constitution. But these failed to appeal to the new cheaply educated reading public who had no share in the inheritance of those ideals, who wanted redistribution of wealth, and had their own peculiar codes of moral and s*xual freedom. Even those who were impressed by the wit and wisdom of the past could not shut their eyes to the change that had come about on account of the use of machinery, scientific development, and the general atmosphere of instability and flux in which they lived. So they demanded a literature which suited the new atmosphere. The modern writers found in these readers a source of power and income, if they could only appeal to them, and give them what they wanted. The temptation to do so was great and it was fraught with great dangers, because the new reading public were uncertain of their ideologies, detached from their background, but desperately anxious to be impressed. They wanted to be led and shown the way. The result was that some of the twentieth century authors exploited their enthusiasm and tried to lead their innocent readers in the quickest, easiest way, by playing on their susceptibilities. In some cases the clever writer might end as a prophet of a school in which he did not believe. Such was the power wielded by the reading public.
One great disadvantage under which the modern writers labour is that there is no common ground on which they and their readers meet. This was not so during the Victorian period, where the authors and the reading public understood each other, and had the common outlook on and attitude to life and its problems. In the atmosphere of disillusionment, discontent and doubt, different authors show different approaches to life. Some lament the passing of old values, and express a sense of nostalgia. Some show an utter despair of the future; while others recommend reverting to an artificial primitivism. Some concentrate on sentiment, style or diction in order to recover what has been lost. Thus among the twentieth century writers are sometimes found aggressive attempts to retain or revitalise old values in a new setting or, if it is not possible, to create new values to take their place.
The twentieth century literature which is the product of this tension is, therefore, unique. It is extremely fascinating and, at the same time, very difficult to evaluate, because, to a certain extent, it is a record of uncoordinated efforts. It is not easy to divide it into school and types. It is full of adventures and experiments peculiar to the modern age which is an age of transition and discovery. But there is an undercurrent in it which runs parallel to the turbulent current of ideas which flows with great impetuosity. Though it started as a reaction against ‘Victorianism’ in the beginning of the twentieth century, it is closely bound up with the new ideas which are agitating the mind of the modern man.

فن لینڈ کا کوئی بھی اسکول زیادہ سے زیادہ 195 بچوں پر مشتمل ہوتا ہے جبکہ 19 بچوں پر ایک ٹیچر۔ دنیا میں سب سے لمبی بریک بھی فن لینڈ میں ہی ہوتی ہے، بچے اپنے اسکول ٹائم کا 75 منٹ بریک میں گزارتے ہیں، دوسرے نمبر پر 57 منٹ کی بریک نیو یارک کے اسکولوں میں ہوتی ہے جبکہ ہمارے یہاں اگر والدین کو پتہ چل جائے کہ کوئی اسکول بچوں کو ” پڑھانے” کے بجائے اتنی لمبی بریک دیتا ہے تو وہ اگلے دن ہی بچے اسکول سے نکلوالیں۔خیر، آپ دلچسپ بات ملاحظہ کریں کہ پورے ہفتے میں اسکولوں میں محض 20 گھنٹے ” پڑھائی ” ہوتی ہے۔ جبکہ اساتذہ کے 2 گھنٹے روز اپنی ” اسکلز ” بڑھانے پر صرف ہوتے ہیں۔ سات سال سے پہلے بچوں کے لیےپورے ملک میں کوئی اسکول نہیں ہے اور پندرہ سال سے پہلے کسی بھی قسم کا کوئی باقاعدہ امتحان بھی نہیں ہے۔ ریاضی کے ایک استاد سے پوچھا گیا کہ آپ بچوں کو کیا سکھاتے ہیں تو وہ مسکراتے ہوئے بولے ” میں بچوں کو خوش رہنا اور دوسروں کو خوش رکھنا سکھاتا ہوں، کیونکہ اس طرح وہ زندگی کہ ہر سوال کو با آسانی حل کرسکتے ہیں “۔آپ جاپان کی مثال لے لیں تیسری جماعت تک بچوں کو ایک ہی مضمون سکھا یا جاتا ہےاور وہ ” اخلاقیات ” اور ” آداب ” ہیں۔ حضرت علیؓ نے فرمایا “جس میں ادب نہیں اس میں دین نہیں “۔ مجھے نہیں معلوم کہ جاپان والے حضرت علیؓ کو کیسے جانتے ہیں اور ہمیں ابھی تک ان کی یہ بات معلوم کیوں نہ ہو سکی۔ بہر حال، اس پر عمل کی ذمہ داری فی الحال جاپان والوں نے لی ہوئی ہے۔ ہمارے ایک دوست جاپان گئے اور ایئر پورٹ پر پہنچ کر انہوں نے اپنا تعارف کروایا کہ وہ ایک استاد ہیںاور پھر ان کو لگا کہ شاید وہ جاپان کے وزیر اعظم ہیں۔اشفاق احمد صاحب مرحوم کو ایک دفعہ اٹلی میں عدالت جانا پڑا اور انہوں نے بھی اپنا تعارف کروایا کہ میں استاد ہوں وہ لکھتے ہیں کہ جج سمیت کورٹ میں موجود تمام لوگ اپنی نشستوں سے کھڑے ہوگئے اس دن مجھے معلوم ہوا کہ قوموں کی عزت کا راز استادوں کی عزت میں ہے۔ یہ ہے قوموں کی ترقی اور عروج و زوال کا راز۔جاپان میں معاشرتی علوم ” پڑھائی” نہیں جاتی ہے کیونکہ یہ سکھانے کی چیز ہےپڑھانے کی نہیں اور وہ اپنی نسلوں کو بہت خوبی کے ساتھ معاشرت سکھا رہے ہیں۔ جاپان کے اسکولوں میں صفائی ستھرائی کے لیے بچے اور اساتذہ خود ہی اہتمام کرتے ہیں، صبح آٹھ بجے اسکول آنے کے بعد سے 10 بجے تک پورا اسکول بچوں اور اساتذہ سمیت صفائی میں مشغول رہتا ہے۔دوسری طرف آپ ہمارا تعلیمی نظام ملاحظہ کریںجو صرف نقل اور چھپائی پر مشتمل ہے، ہمارے بچے ” پبلشرز ” بن چکے ہیں۔ آپ تماشہ دیکھیں جو کتاب میں لکھا ہوتا ہے اساتذہ اسی کو بورڈ پر نقل کرتے ہیں، بچے دوبارہ اسی کو کاپی پر چھاپ دیتے ہیں، اساتذہ اسی نقل شدہ اور چھپے ہوئے مواد کو امتحان میں دیتے ہیں، خود ہی اہم سوالوں پر نشانات لگواتے ہیںاور خود ہی پیپر بناتے ہیں اور خود ہی اس کو چیک کر کے خود نمبر بھی دے دیتے ہیں،بچے کے پاس یا فیل ہونے کا فیصلہ بھی خود ہی صادر کردیتے ہیں اور ماں باپ اس نتیجے پر تالیاں بجا بجا کر بچوں کے ذہین اور قابل ہونے کے گن گاتے رہتے ہیں، جن کے بچے فیل ہوجاتے ہیں وہ اس نتیجے پر افسوس کرتے رہتے ہیں اور اپنے بچے کو ” کوڑھ مغز ” اور ” کند ذہن ” کا طعنہ دیتے رہتے ہیں۔ ہم 13، 14 سال تک بچوں کو قطار میں کھڑا کر کر کے اسمبلی کرواتے ہیں اوروہ اسکول سے فارغ ہوتے ہی قطار کو توڑ کر اپنا کام کرواتے ہیں، جو جتنے بڑے اسکول سے پڑھا ہوتا ہے قطار کو روندتے ہوئے سب سے پہلے اپنا کام کروانے کا ہنر جانتا ہے ۔طالبعلموں کا اسکول میں سارا وقت سائنس ” رٹتے ” گزرتا ہے اور آپ کو پورے ملک میں کوئی ” سائنس دان ” نامی چیز نظر نہیں آئے گی کیونکہبدقسمتی سے سائنس ” سیکھنے ” کی اور خود تجربہ کرنے کی چیز ہےاور ہم اسے بھی ” رٹّا” لگواتے ہیں۔آپ حیران ہوں گے میٹرک کلاس کا پہلا امتحان 1858ء میں ہوا اور برطانوی حکومت نے یہ طے کیا کہ بر صغیر کے لوگ ہماری عقل سے آدھے ہوتے ہیں اس لیے ہمارے پاس ” پاسنگ مارکس ” 65 ہیں تو بر صغیر والوں کے لیے 32 اعشاریہ 5 ہونے چاہئیں۔ دو سال بعد 1860ء میں اساتذہ کی آسانی کے لیے پاسنگ مارکس 33 کردیے گئےاور ہم میں بھی ان ہی 33 نمبروں سے اپنے بچوں کی ذہانت کو تلاش کرنے میں مصروف ہیں۔علامہ اقبال ؒ کے شعر کا یہ مصرعہ اس تمام صورتحال کی صیح طریقے سے ترجمانی کرتا نظر آتا ہے کہ۔۔شاخ نازک پر بنے گا جو آشیانہ ، ناپائیدار ہو گا۔

edu.semgu.kz

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edu.semgu.kz/ebook/umm/e257597e-8ca8-11e3-bf6e-f6d299da70eeNew_English_File_Intermediate_-_Student__s_Book(1).pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj59PH6vs7hAhUC16QKHQ1bD14QFjATegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1FM-qDoKJn9M7myKw4hom0

edu.semgu.kz

One of the devoted students of Usman Academy of English Sarai Alamgir successfully passed B.A English from the academy few years back and now he is serving as Sub inspecter/ PO Patroll officer in National Highways and Motorway Police.Proud of you dear student.You have a mature mind and a positive energy.keep on injecting your positivity to others.Stay blessed.