9416-2.doc

Course: English Literature (9416)
Semester: Spring, 2021
1
ASSIGNMENT No. 2
Q.1 Comment on the major themes of ‘The Kite Runner’ by Khaled Hosseini. Do you think it’s a true
depiction of the Afghan culture?
Amir’s quest to redeem himself makes up the heart of the novel. Early on, Amir strives to redeem himself in
Baba’s eyes, primarily because his mother died giving birth to him, and he feels responsible. To redeem himself
to Baba, Amir thinks he must win the kite-tournament and bring Baba the losing kite, both of which are inciting
incidents that set the rest of the novel in motion. The more substantial part of Amir’s search for redemption,
however, stems from his guilt regarding Hassan. That guilt drives the climactic events of the story, including
Amir’s journey to Kabul to find Sohrab and his confrontation with Assef. The moral standard Amir must meet
to earn his redemption is set early in the book, when Baba says that a boy who doesn’t stand up for himself
becomes a man who can’t stand up to anything. As a boy, Amir fails to stand up for himself. As an adult, he can
only redeem himself by proving he has the courage to stand up for what is right.
The Love and Tension Between Fathers and Sons
Amir has a very complex relationship with Baba, and as much as Amir loves Baba, he rarely feels Baba fully
loves him back. Amir’s desire to win Baba’s love consequently motivates him not to stop Hassan’s rape. Baba
has his own difficulty connecting with Amir. He feels guilty treating Amir well when he can’t acknowledge
Hassan as his son. As a result, he is hard on Amir, and he can only show his love for Hassan indirectly, by
bringing Hassan along when he takes Amir out, for instance, or paying for Hassan’s lip surgery. In contrast with
this, the most loving relationship between father and son we see is that of Hassan and Sohrab. Hassan, however,
is killed, and toward the end of the novel we watch Amir trying to become a substitute father to Sohrab. Their
relationship experiences its own strains as Sohrab, who is recovering from the loss of his parents and the abuse
he suffered, has trouble opening up to Amir.
The Intersection of Political Events and Private Lives
The major events of the novel, while framed in the context of Amir’s life, follow Afghanistan’s transitions as
well. In Amir’s recollections of his childhood, we see the calm state of Kabul during the monarchy, the
founding of the republic, and then watch as the Soviet invasion and infighting between rival Afghan groups ruin
the country. These events have a hand in dictating the novel’s plot and have significant effects on the lives of
the characters involved. The establishment of the republic gives Assef an opportunity to harass Amir, simply
because Assef’s father knows the new president. Later, Kabul’s destruction forces Baba and Amir to flee to
California. When the Taliban take over after that, they murder Hassan and even give Assef a position that lets
him indulge his sadism and sexual urges without repercussions. Both of these events factor into Amir’s mission
to save Sohrab and his redemption by confronting Assef, subtly implying that Afghanistan will similarly have
its own redemption one day.

2
The Persistence of the Past
All the characters in the novel feel the influence of the past, but none so much as Amir and Sohrab. In Sohrab’s
case, his past has been so traumatizing that it affects all his behavior. The prolonged physical and sexual abuse
he endured makes him flinch anytime Amir touches him. He also fears the abandonment he experienced when
his parents died so much that he attempts suicide when Amir says he may have to go back to an orphanage. For
Amir, the past is always with him, from the book’s first sentence, when he says he became what he is today at
the age of twelve, to its final sentence. That’s because Amir defines himself by his past. His feelings of guilt for
his past actions continue to motivate him. Amir even feels responsible for the Taliban murdering Hassan
because he thinks he set in motion the events that led to Hassan’s death when when he pushed Hassan and Ali
out of Baba’s house. As he says on the book’s first page, the past can never be buried.
Male Friendship
The Kite Runner focuses nearly exclusively on male relationships. While the relationship between father and
son is important to the novel, male friendship is central as well. Amir’s relationship with Hassan is the most
obvious example. Though the two are constant companions, Amir’s superior social status causes a power
difference between them, which is later complicated when Amir learns that Hassan is actually his half-brother.
Amir realizes that the favor Baba showed Hassan was that of a father to a son, and he reflects on the way he let
his jealousy corrupt his friendship with Hassan. Despite this problematic dynamic, Hassan is clearly a
wonderful friend, as demonstrated by his willingness to support Amir even when it is difficult or dangerous to
do so. This loyalty is evidenced most clearly by Hassan’s kite-running, and his refusal to give Assef the kite he
runs for Amir, resulting in Assef raping Hassan as punishment.
Rahim Khan is another important character for understanding male friendship in the novel. He is a friend to
both Baba and Amir, and in those relationships, he takes the role of pushing back against the questionable
choices both men make. Rahim Khan can take this role because he occupies the same social position as Baba
and Amir. It is Rahim Khan who knows his friends’ innermost secrets—that Baba slept with Ali’s wife and
Amir allowed Hassan’s rape—and yet he does not lord these secrets over them, instead choosing to be a voice
of reason and call the other characters back to goodness. Rahim Khan’s morality is evident in his phone call to
grown-up Amir, in which he states “there is a way to be good again.” As a friend, Rahim provides Amir with “a
way to end the cycle” of betrayals and secrets.
Q.2 Is the plot of a Drama different from the plot of a Novel? Comment in terms of examples given in
your textbook.
The primary similarities between a novel and a drama are that they both have plots, complete with rising
action, climax, falling action, and resolution; they both have conflicts, characters, and themes. They both tell
stories, essentially—they simply differ in the manner in which they tell it.

3
A drama is meant to be performed, to be seen and heard. It does not typically have a narrator, someone who can
interpret characters' actions or thoughts, as some novels do. A novel will always have a narrator, even if that
narrator can only report what is visible to the protagonist. A drama is going to rely on dialogue as its main mode
of conveying information. Everything the audience needs to know must be spoken aloud, and so characters
sometimes deliver soliloquies or asides in order to share their internal thoughts and feelings with us.
A soliloquy is when a character is alone on stage, speaking his or her thoughts aloud. An aside refers to
moments when a character speaks to him or herself, to another character, or to the audience, and, by convention,
those characters who are not supposed to hear do not hear (even if the actor is standing close enough to hear
what the other says).
Drama and Novel and the same in that they both tell a story of some sort. They can also have similarities based
on their content; they can both be comedies or trajedies, or follow like plot structures. Sometimes there are
even stories made into both novels and dramas.
The differences are a little more marked. Novels are always written in prose, or the traditional sentence
structure, free of a particular rhythem or pattern. Drama is usually written in the form of dialogue and can often
employ more poetic structures. They both have a plot, a main theme, and often both major and minor
characters.
The main difference is that drama is meant to be performed. The word drama actually means action. Novels
are meant to be read. Although novels sometimes have dialogue, it is not always included and is not a necessary
part of the structure like it is for drama.
Often, novels are longer than dramas for the simple fact that people want to see the drama performed in one
sitting and the novels is meant to be read over time.
Q.3 Define the following with appropriate examples from your textbook.
i. Hamartia
The hero's error or frailty (harmartia) is often misleadingly explained as his "tragic flaw," in the sense of that
personal quality which inevitably causes his downfall or subjects him to retribution. However, overemphasis on
a search for the decisive flaw in the protagonist as the key factor for understanding the tragedy can lead to
superficial or false interpretations. It gives more attention to personality than the dramatists intended and
ignores the broader philosophical implications of the typical plot's denouement. It is true that the hero
frequently takes a step that initiates the events of the tragedy and, owing to his own ignorance or poor judgment,
acts in such a way as to bring about his own downfall. In a more sophisticated philosophical sense though, the
hero's fate, despite its immediate cause in his finite act, comes about because of the nature of the cosmic moral
order and the role played by chance or destiny in human affairs. Unless the conclusions of most tragedies are
interpreted on this level, the reader is forced to credit the Greeks with the most primitive of moral systems.

4
It is worth noting that some scholars believe the "flaw" was intended by Aristotle as a necessary corollary of his
requirement that the hero should not be a completely admirable man. Harmartia would thus be the factor that
delimits the protagonist's imperfection and keeps him on a human plane, making it possible for the audience to
sympathize with him. This view tends to give the "flaw" an ethical definition but relates it only to the spectators'
reactions to the hero and does not increase its importance for interpreting the tragedies.
ii. Catastrophe
These are "reversal" (peripeteia), where the opposite of what was planned or hoped for by the protagonist takes
place, as when Oedipus' investigation of the murder of Laius leads to a catastrophic and unexpected conclusion;
and "recognition" (anagnorisis), the point when the protagonist recognizes the truth of a situation, discovers
another character's identity, or comes to a realization about himself. This sudden acquisition of knowledge or
insight by the hero arouses the desired intense emotional reaction in the spectators, as when Oedipus finds out
his true parentage and realizes what crimes he has been responsible for.
Aristotle wrote the Poetics nearly a century after the greatest Greek tragedians had already died, in a period
when there had been radical transformations in nearly all aspects of Athenian society and culture. The tragic
drama of his day was not the same as that of the fifth century, and to a certain extent his work must be construed
as a historical study of a genre that no longer existed rather than as a description of a living art form.
In the Poetics, Aristotle used the same analytical methods that he had successfully applied in studies of politics,
ethics, and the natural sciences in order to determine tragedy's fundamental principles of composition and
content. This approach is not completely suited to a literary study and is sometimes too artificial or formula-
prone in its conclusions.
iii. Peripeteia
The remainder of the Poetics is given over to examination of the other elements of tragedy and to discussion of
various techniques, devices, and stylistic principles. Aristotle mentions two features of the plot, both of which
are related to the concept of harmartia, as crucial components of any well-made tragedy. These are "reversal"
(peripeteia), where the opposite of what was planned or hoped for by the protagonist takes place, as when
Oedipus' investigation of the murder of Laius leads to a catastrophic and unexpected conclusion; and
"recognition" (anagnorisis), the point when the protagonist recognizes the truth of a situation, discovers another
character's identity, or comes to a realization about himself. This sudden acquisition of knowledge or insight by
the hero arouses the desired intense emotional reaction in the spectators, as when Oedipus finds out his true
parentage and realizes what crimes he has been responsible for.
Aristotle wrote the Poetics nearly a century after the greatest Greek tragedians had already died, in a period
when there had been radical transformations in nearly all aspects of Athenian society and culture. The tragic
drama of his day was not the same as that of the fifth century, and to a certain extent his work must be construed
as a historical study of a genre that no longer existed rather than as a description of a living art form.

5
In the Poetics, Aristotle used the same analytical methods that he had successfully applied in studies of politics,
ethics, and the natural sciences in order to determine tragedy's fundamental principles of composition and
content. This approach is not completely suited to a literary study and is sometimes too artificial or formula-
prone in its conclusions.
Nonetheless, the Poetics is the only critical study of Greek drama to have been made by a near-contemporary. It
contains much valuable information about the origins, methods, and purposes of tragedy, and to a degree shows
us how the Greeks themselves reacted to their theater. In addition, Aristotle's work had an overwhelming
influence on the development of drama long after it was compiled. The ideas and principles of the Poetics are
reflected in the drama of the Roman Empire and dominated the composition of tragedy in western Europe
during the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries.
Q.4 Do you agree that prose is dull boring and unimaginative form of writing? Give examples to back
your claim.
Avoid pretentious, vapid beginnings. If you are writing a paper on, say, British responses to the rebellion in
India in 1857, don't open with a statement like this: “Throughout human history people in all cultures
everywhere in the world have engaged in many and long-running conflicts about numerous aspects of
government policy and diplomatic issues, which have much interested historians and generated historical
theories in many areas.” This is pure garbage, bores the reader, and is a sure sign that you have nothing
substantive to say. Get to the point. Here’s a better start: “The rebellion in 1857 compelled the British to rethink
their colonial administration in India.” This sentence tells the reader what your paper is actually about and
clears the way for you to state your thesis in the rest of the opening paragraph. For example, you might go on to
argue that greater British sensitivity to Indian customs was hypocritical.
Whether you are writing an exam essay or a senior thesis, you need to have a thesis. Don’t just repeat the
assignment or start writing down everything that you know about the subject. Ask yourself, “What exactly am I
trying to prove?” Your thesis is your take on the subject, your perspective, your explanation—that is, the case
that you’re going to argue. “Famine struck Ireland in the 1840s” is a true statement, but it is not a thesis. “The
English were responsible for famine in Ireland in the 1840s” is a thesis (whether defensible or not is another
matter). A good thesis answers an important research question about how or why something happened. (“Who
was responsible for the famine in Ireland in the 1840s?”) Once you have laid out your thesis, don’t forget about
it. Develop your thesis logically from paragraph to paragraph. Your reader should always know where your
argument has come from, where it is now, and where it is going.
Students are often puzzled when their professors mark them down for summarizing or merely narrating rather
than analyzing. What does it mean to analyze? In the narrow sense, to analyze means to break down into parts
and to study the interrelationships of those parts. If you analyze water, you break it down into hydrogen and
oxygen. In a broader sense, historical analysis explains the origins and significance of events. Historical

6
analysis digs beneath the surface to see relationships or distinctions that are not immediately obvious. Historical
analysis is critical; it evaluates sources, assigns significance to causes, and weighs competing explanations.
Don’t push the distinction too far, but you might think of summary and analysis this way: Who, what,
when, and where are the stuff of summary; how, why, and to what effect are the stuff of analysis. Many students
think that they have to give a long summary (to show the professor that they know the facts) before they get to
their analysis. Try instead to begin your analysis as soon as possible, sometimes without any summary at all.
The facts will “shine through” a good analysis. You can't do an analysis unless you know the facts, but you can
summarize the facts without being able to do an analysis. Summary is easier and less sophisticated than
analysis—that’s why summary alone never earns an “A.”
Like good detectives, historians are critical of their sources and cross-check them for reliability. You wouldn't
think much of a detective who relied solely on a suspect’s archenemy to check an alibi. Likewise, you wouldn't
think much of a historian who relied solely on the French to explain the origins of World War I. Consider the
following two statements on the origin of World War I: 1) “For the catastrophe of 1914 the Germans are
responsible. Only a professional liar would deny this...” 2) “It is not true that Germany is guilty of having
caused this war. Neither the people, the government, nor the Kaiser wanted war....” They can’t both be right, so
you have to do some detective work. As always, the best approach is to ask: Who wrote the source? Why?
When? Under what circumstances? For whom? The first statement comes from a book by the French politician
Georges Clemenceau, which he wrote in 1929 at the very end of his life. In 1871, Clemenceau had vowed
revenge against Germany for its defeat of France in the Franco-Prussian War. As premier of France from 1917
to 1920, he represented France at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. He was obviously not a disinterested
observer. The second statement comes from a manifesto published by ninety-three prominent German
intellectuals in the fall of 1914. They were defending Germany against charges of aggression and brutality.
They too were obviously not disinterested observers. Now, rarely do you encounter such extreme bias and
passionate disagreement, but the principle of criticizing and cross-checking sources always applies. In general,
the more sources you can use, and the more varied they are, the more likely you are to make a sound historical
judgment, especially when passions and self-interests are engaged. You don’t need to be cynical as a historian
(self-interest does not explain everything), but you do need to be critical and skeptical. Competent historians
may offer different interpretations of the same evidence or choose to stress different evidence. You will not find
a single historical Truth with a capital “T” on any matter of significance. You can, however, learn to
discriminate among conflicting interpretations, not all of which are created equal.
Q.5 Differentiate between poetry and prose. How can the same idea be presented in both?
In writing, prose refers to any written work that follows a basic grammatical structure (think words and
phrases arranged into sentences and paragraphs). This stands out from works of poetry, which follow a

7
metrical structure (think lines and stanzas). Prose simply means language that follows the natural patterns
found in everyday speech.
Types of Prose
Prose can vary depending according to style and purpose. There are four distinct types of prose that writers
use:
1. Nonfictional prose. Prose that is a true story or factual account of events or information is
nonfiction. Textbooks, newspaper articles, and instruction manuals all fall into this category. Anne
Frank’s Diary of a Young Girl, composed entirely of journal excerpts, recounts the young teen’s
experience of hiding with her family in Nazi-occupied Netherlands during World War II.
2. Fictional prose. A literary work of fiction. This is the most popular type of literary prose, used in
novels and short stories, and generally has characters, plot, setting, and dialogue.
3. Heroic prose. A literary work that is either written down or preserved through oral tradition, but is
meant to be recited. Heroic prose is usually a legend or fable. The twelfth-century Irish tales
revolving around the mythical warrior Finn McCool are an example of heroic prose.
4. Prose poetry. Poetry written in prose form. This literary hybrid can sometimes have rhythmic and
rhyming patterns. French poet Charles Baudelaire wrote prose poems, including “Be Drunk” which
starts off: “And if sometimes, on the steps of a palace or the green grass of a ditch, in the mournful
solitude of your room.”
George Orwell was known for his attitude toward plain language. He once said: “Never use a long word where
a short one will do.” Prose can also:
 Fulfill a story’s promise. In literature, the basic purpose of prose in writing is to convey an idea, deliver
information, or tell a story. Prose is the way a writer fulfills her basic promise to a reader to deliver a
story with characters, setting, conflict, a plot, and a final payoff.
 Create a voice. Each writer has their own way of using language, called a writer’s voice. Using prose in
different ways helps writers craft and show off this voice. Take Charles Dickens’ voice in David
Copperfield as an example: “New thoughts and hopes were whirling through my mind, and all the colors
of my life were changing.”
 Builds rapport through familiarity. Prose is often conversational in tone. This familiarity helps
connect readers to a story and its characters. Jane Austen was known for her straightforward, accessible
prose. Take this line from Emma: “Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich, with a comfortable
home and happy disposition, seemed to unite some of the best blessings of existence; and had lived
nearly twenty-one years in the world with very little to distress or vex her.”
The difference between prose and poetry can be drawn clearly on the following grounds:

8
1. Prose refers to a form of literature, having ordinary language and sentence structure. Poetry is that form
of literature, which is aesthetic by nature, i.e. it has a sound, cadence, rhyme, metre, etc., that adds to its
meaning.
2. The language of prose is quite direct or straightforward. On the other hand, in poetry, we use an
expressive or creative language, which includes comparisons, rhyme and rhythm that give it a unique
cadence and feel.
3. While the prose is pragmatic, i.e. realistic, poetry is figurative.
4. Prose contains paragraphs, which includes a number of sentences, that has an implied message or idea.
As against, poetry is written in verses, which are covered in stanzas. These verses leave a lot of unsaid
things, and its interpretation depends upon the imagination of the reader.
5. The prose is utilitarian, which conveys a hidden moral, lesson or idea. Conversely, poetry aims to
delight or amuse the reader.
6. The most important thing in prose is the message or information. In contrast, the poet shares his/her
experience or feelings with the reader, which plays a crucial role in poetry.
7. In prose, there are no line breaks, whereas when it comes to poetry, there are a number of line breaks,
which is just to follow the beat or to stress on an idea.
8. When it comes to paraphrasing or summarizing, both prose and poetry can be paraphrased, but the
paraphrase of the poem is not the poem, because the essence of the poem lies in the style of writing, i.e.
the way in which the poet has expressed his/her experience in verses and stanzas. So, this writing pattern
and cadence is the beauty of poetry, which cannot be summarized.
Q.6 How is a short story different from a novella? Discuss with help of appropriate examples.
The Reluctant Fundamentalist is a good example of a Bildungsroman, or coming of age novel. In the early
chapters, Changez, the protagonist (his name clues us in to the character development he’ll undergo) is an
uncertain, passive young man. He travels all over the world (to Princeton University, to Greece, to New York
City) without ever voicing a particularly strong reason for choosing to go to these places. In reality, he doesn’t
“choose” to go to Princeton or New York at all – he obeys what others tell him, or does what he thinks he’s
supposed to do. Because of his passivity in most of the first half of the book, Changez encounters many
different models for how he should come of age. One important model is Princeton University, where he
absorbs the unstated but accepted idea that a valuable life is one in which he uses his intelligence and
knowledge to help a capitalist American company, which in his case is Underwood Samson. It’s only when he
looks back on his life later that Changez realizes that this was the hidden message of his Princeton education
and that he has allowed others to control his own development.
In the aftermath of September 11, Changez encounters new hostility from Americans: an aggressive airport
security guard detains him, and pedestrians harass him. He begins to realize that the ideal of growing up he’s

9
been fed at Princeton and Underwood Samson makes him useful to Americans, but doesn’t actually make him a
part of America. Despite his contributions, he’s still seen as an outsider in the United States. Naturally angry at
having been used and rejected in this way, he begins to rebel against America and Underwood Samson in small
ways, such as growing out his beard – an expression of his desire to take control of his own life and a symbol of
his coming of age. Changez’s ultimate choice to leave the United States for Pakistan contrasts markedly with
his early, passive traveling.
But even if The Reluctant Fundamentalist is a book about growing up, it’s not completely clear what Changez
grows up to be. He returns to Pakistan to become a university lecturer, but the novel never reveals whether or
not he has become a supporter of terrorist groups, or simply a peaceful critic of American foreign policy.
Changez’s identity is unclear to us; it may also be unclear to Changez himself. The ambiguity of the ending, in
which it is unclear whether he is about to befriend or attack the Stranger, may be read as a sign that Changez is
still growing and still has choices to make, choices that will define who he will become.
Length
Short Stories are shorter than novels.
Novels are longer than short stories.
Sitting and Effect
Short Stories are intended to be read in a single sitting and designed to produce a single effect.
Novels are not intended to be read in a single sitting and not designed to produce a single effect.
Plot
Short Story contains one basic plot.
Novels can contain many subplots and a complex main plot.
Characterization
Short Stories focus on one or two characters.
Novels can focus on multiple characters.
Time period
Short Stories generally cover a very short time period.
Novels can cover very long periods.
Q.7 Read ‘Salt and Saffron’ by Kamila Shamsie and explain how she uses lexical code switching in her
Novel. What does the writer aim to achieve?
A Stylistic Analysis of Salt and Saffron insinuates to the study of the novel through the aim of some
Linguistic approaches, as stylistics is the application of linguistics to the study of Literature. The appearance of
stylistics as a semi- independent discipline is an advanced trend. The employ of linguistics, method has allowed
“stylistics to move yon earlier perspective descriptions of accurate vogue to a fuller analysis of language itself
and also the functions to that language often is put”. In the present state of a literary text can be a way to a fuller

10
perception and admiration of the writer artistic achievement. It explores how readers relate with language and
are affected by texts when they study them. In this regard, a checklist designed by Leech and Short (2007) gives
a significant direction to study the linguistic characteristics of the novel as is made clear in the subtitle of the
research work a study through Leech and Short Model. The present study of „Salt and Saffron‟ includes of the
lexical and grammatical analysis of the text as the best place to begin a stylistic analysis is with syntax since this
guides straight to the depth of a text by investigating its structure as quoted by Leech (2007). The study of the
significant linguistic designs will relate to the issues of the crucial issues of the novel. There is a powerful
connection between linguistics and stylistics. Both of the fields study language as their basic concern. The
difference between the two is that the object of linguistics is to study general and theoretical aspects of language
termed language while the aim of stylistics is to study the specific cases of language use termed parole.
Stylistics is the part of linguistics which is focused on-variation in the use of language, often, but not entirely,
with special considerations to the most uncertain and complicated uses of language in literature. Stylistics is the
research of the symbols in languages (such as rhetorical figures and syntactical patterns) that are considered to
make expressive or literary style. Stylistics is therefore a subject or study that mingles both literary analysis on
the one hand and linguistics on the other as its morphological framework recommends: the style part relating it
to literary analysis and the istics branch to linguistics. As “Stylistics is basically described as the (linguistic)
study of style, is hardly undertaken for its own sake, simply as an application in describing what employ is
made of language” (Leech & Short, 1981, p. 13). They are also of the view that we normally study style because
we like to explain something, and in general, literary stylistics has, absolutely or clearly, the goal of explaining
the relation between language and artistic role.

9416-2.doc

More Related Content

More from Noaman Akbar (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

9416-2.doc