Translate

Thursday, December 26, 2024

Bhagat Singh - A Revolutionary Beyond Reproach

Can you imagine anyone labeling Shaheed-e-Azam Bhagat Singh as indolent? Or accusing him of being duplicitous? Even more shockingly, can you fathom the allegation that Bhagat Singh deceived his comrades during hunger strikes by secretly eating, resulting in weight gain? These outrageous accusations were made against the legendary freedom fighter in Kanpur, a city closely associated with his revolutionary activities, during a session at the Kanpur Literature Festival.

At this event, so-called historian Dr. Aparna Vaidik, author of Revolution on Trial, and session moderator Ishan Sharma made disparaging remarks about Bhagat Singh’s character. Sharma initiated the attack by calling Singh a “man of dual character” and a “chameleon,” which Vaidik expanded upon by claiming Singh was a comfort-seeking individual who enjoyed fine clothes and Charlie Chaplin movies. She further alleged that he collaborated with hotel managers for meals and secretly consumed food during hunger strikes.

The Baseless Accusations Debunked

Bhagat Singh’s life is meticulously documented through numerous books, letters, and British jail records, all of which contradict these claims. From his teenage years, Bhagat Singh dedicated every moment to the cause of India’s freedom. At the age of 16, he left his home to join Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi’s newspaper Pratap, writing under the pseudonym Balwant Singh. His revolutionary journey, inspired by Ghadar Party martyr Kartar Singh Sarabha, began early and culminated in acts like the assassination of British officer Saunders in 1928 and the bombing of the Central Legislative Assembly in 1929.

These events highlight Bhagat Singh’s unwavering commitment to the nation’s liberation. The allegation that he was a comfort-seeker falls flat when examining his rigorous lifestyle and sacrifices.

Hunger Strikes and Alleged Deception

Dr. Vaidik’s assertion that Bhagat Singh ate secretly during his hunger strikes is not only baseless but also insulting. Historical accounts, including those by Jawaharlal Nehru, who met Singh during his 1930 hunger strike in Lahore Jail, portray a frail but determined revolutionary. Nehru noted the spiritual aura and calm demeanor of Bhagat Singh, despite the physical toll of his protest.

Singh’s weight fluctuation during hunger strikes could have been due to medical reasons or British propaganda to tarnish his image. However, primary sources, including his letters and writings, unequivocally affirm his integrity.

The Legacy of Bhagat Singh

Bhagat Singh’s intellectual depth is evident in his extensive writings, including a 404-page diary documenting over 100 revolutionary thinkers, philosophers, and leaders. He translated Irish revolutionary Donal O’Brien’s autobiography during his incarceration, underscoring his intellectual pursuits even in jail.

The accusations made at the Kanpur Literature Festival are a disservice to Bhagat Singh’s legacy. His life, defined by sacrifice and unwavering commitment, leaves no room for such baseless allegations. Attempts to malign his character must be met with facts and reverence for his contributions to India’s independence.

Shaheed-e-Azam Bhagat Singh remains a symbol of courage, integrity, and intellect—a revolutionary whose legacy is impervious to such unfounded critiques.

Wednesday, December 25, 2024

A Tribute to Shyam Benegal - The Maestro Who Bridged Cinema and Society

Shyam Benegal, a towering figure in Indian cinema, was cremated with full state honors at Shivaji Park Crematorium in Mumbai on December 24, 2024. His passing marks the end of an era in Indian filmmaking, but his legacy remains a beacon for aspiring storytellers. Over his illustrious career, Benegal demonstrated how social and political issues could seamlessly intertwine with meaningful cinema, creating films that resonate even decades after their release.

Benegal’s journey in cinema began with his debut feature Ankur (1974), a film that not only reflected the socio-political realities of its time but also set the tone for his lifelong commitment to socially conscious storytelling. For half a century, his works have been a mirror to society, addressing themes of caste, gender, class, and the complexities of modernity without resorting to overt moralizing. His films remain relevant today, a testament to their profound understanding of human nature and societal structures.

Indian cinema, particularly in the post-Independence era, grappled with the weight of Partition and a fragmented polity. While filmmakers like Bimal Roy (Do Bigha Zamin), V. Shantaram (Do Aankhen Barah Haath), and B. R. Chopra (Naya Daur) pioneered socially themed narratives within popular cinema, Benegal carved a unique space. Inspired by these stalwarts, he adopted a sparse yet deeply evocative storytelling style, eschewing the flamboyance of mainstream cinema while broadening its appeal. Collaborating with the legendary composer Vanraj Bhatia, Benegal infused his films with unforgettable music that enriched the narrative experience.

Central to Benegal’s artistry was his partnership with cinematographer Govind Nihalani, whose visual sensibilities brought to life the striking imagery of Nishant, Manthan, Bhumika, Junoon, and Kalyug. Equally pivotal was his repertory of actors—stalwarts like Naseeruddin Shah, Shabana Azmi, Smita Patil, Om Puri, and Amrish Puri—who became integral to his cinematic vision. This ensemble, coupled with his deeply humanistic approach, rendered his narratives both timeless and relatable.

Unlike many of his contemporaries in parallel cinema, Benegal’s works achieved the rare feat of appealing to a broad audience while maintaining artistic integrity. His films did not preach; instead, they invited introspection through nuanced characters and layered storytelling, often punctuated with humor and warmth. This balance of accessibility and depth set him apart, enabling his films to transcend the boundaries of “art” and “mainstream” cinema.

Shyam Benegal’s contributions to Indian cinema go beyond his filmography. He redefined the language of Indian cinema, bridging the gap between art and commerce, and set an enduring example of how to engage with society’s truths through storytelling. As we bid farewell to this cinematic giant, his legacy reminds us that films, at their best, are not just stories but reflections of the world we live in. Benegal’s work will continue to inspire generations of filmmakers to craft cinema that is both meaningful and memorable.

Thursday, December 19, 2024

Eklavya - A Timeless Symbol of Merit and Suppression

In Parliament on December 15, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi invoked the Mahabharata’s Eklavya to highlight social justice issues and criticize government policies. Gandhi likened Eklavya’s sacrifice of his thumb, demanded by Dronacharya, to the metaphorical "thumb-cutting" of India’s youth, small businesses, and farmers by favoring big corporations and implementing schemes like Agniveer. His remarks raise questions about historical inequities and the enduring relevance of Eklavya's story.

Eklavya, a skilled Nishad archer, sought to learn under Dronacharya, the royal teacher of the Kaurava and Pandava princes, but was refused due to his tribal origins. Undeterred, Eklavya crafted a clay idol of Drona and mastered archery independently. His exceptional skill was revealed when he silenced a dog using arrows in a way that caused no harm. Impressed but wary, Dronacharya demanded Eklavya’s right thumb as a symbolic “guru dakshina,” effectively crippling his prowess to ensure no rival threatened his royal students.

Less commonly known are Eklavya’s origins and fate. He was the son of Hiranyadhanu, a general in the army of Magadha’s king Jarasandha, a foe of Lord Krishna. Some versions suggest Eklavya was abandoned by his biological parents due to ominous prophecies. Despite losing his thumb, Eklavya continued to fight using leather gloves, proving his resilience. Eventually, Lord Krishna killed Eklavya to prevent him from siding with the Kauravas in the impending war.

Eklavya’s story underscores systemic inequities, with Drona’s actions symbolizing the gatekeeping of knowledge and power by privileged classes. Critics view the tale as an allegory of caste-based exclusion, where merit is suppressed to maintain hegemony. However, the Mahabharata’s nuanced lens complicates this narrative, framing actions in terms of dharma—one’s duty under given circumstances.

Drona’s loyalty to the Hastinapur crown and favoritism towards Arjuna raise ethical dilemmas. Was his demand for Eklavya’s thumb justified by duty, or was it a betrayal of merit? Eklavya’s acceptance of Drona as his guru, despite rejection, also raises questions about his understanding of ethical boundaries in warfare.

In popular memory, Eklavya endures as a wronged hero, symbolizing the suppression of talent by entrenched hierarchies. His story resonates deeply in discussions of justice, merit, and the fight against systemic exclusion, making it a poignant allegory for modern struggles.

Sunday, December 15, 2024

Courts, Controversy, and the Perilous Interplay of Religion and Politics

In the labyrinth of judicial proceedings, the act of determining the historical authenticity of religious claims emerges as a treacherous endeavor. Courts, being forums of law and not arbiters of historical truths, lack the legal and evidentiary means to validate or refute assertions tied to alleged historical facts. Such exercises are fraught with peril, as they invariably stir controversy, polarize society, and undermine the sanctity of the judicial process. When courts entertain such claims with undue alacrity, the ripple effects are profound—evoking fear among worshippers, emboldening triumphalism among others, and creating an environment of uncertainty that destabilizes the social fabric.

The alacrity with which these matters are entertained often hints at motivations extending beyond the scope of simple litigation. Claims that certain places of worship are protected monuments under the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act of 1904 are not uncommon. Section 15 of the Act provides for the preservation of such sites, ostensibly justifying access to them. Yet, these claims are undermined by Section 13 of the same Act, which stipulates that the usage of such sites must remain consistent with their religious character. The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act of 1958 reinforces this principle in Section 16, highlighting the legislature’s intent to safeguard the integrity of religious places.

In addition, the Constitution of India, through Article 25, unequivocally guarantees the right to freely practice, profess, and propagate one’s religion. This fundamental right supersedes statutory provisions, ensuring that the character of a place of worship remains inviolate. Thus, litigations based on these Acts, when pitted against constitutional safeguards, are inherently contradictory. They appear not as earnest legal disputes but as deliberate maneuvers aimed at unsettling the delicate equilibrium of religious harmony.

The silence of the government on these contentious issues is both striking and concerning. Inaction in the face of such divisive claims is often interpreted as tacit approval, especially by those who perceive a concerted effort to reshape the narrative of religious coexistence. The specter of December 6, 1992—the demolition of the Babri Masjid—looms large in public memory. The demolition was a watershed moment that underscored the dangerous entanglement of religion and politics. Today, similar litigations, coupled with governmental silence, evoke fears of a recurring pattern where religious grievances are weaponized to serve a larger political agenda.

The underlying intent of these court cases appears to be the perpetuation of a majoritarian triumphalism that blurs the lines between religion and politics. By targeting places of worship associated with minority communities, such litigations foster a divisive narrative of “us” versus “them.” This strategy seeks to consolidate a majoritarian vote bank that transcends caste and creed, creating a unifying force grounded in religious identity. Political rhetoric bordering on hate speech further exacerbates this polarization, emboldening radical elements and normalizing hostility.

The seeds of this movement can be traced back to L.K. Advani’s rath yatra, a campaign that epitomized the confluence of religion and political ambition. What began as a rallying cry for the construction of a temple became a harbinger of communal discord, culminating in the Babri Masjid demolition. The repercussions of that event continue to reverberate through India’s polity, where religious identity often eclipses constitutional values.

The enactment of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, was an attempt to stem the tide of such divisive claims. The Act sought to preserve the status quo of all places of worship as of August 15, 1947, thereby preventing the resurrection of historical disputes. Yet, decades later, the same wounds are being reopened under the guise of legal claims. This resurgence undermines the intent of the Act and violates the constitutional safeguards enshrined in Article 25.

Religion, when wielded as a political tool, becomes antithetical to the ethos of a secular republic. The framers of the Constitution envisioned a society where religion flourished as a matter of personal faith and community welfare, not as a vehicle for political gain. The use of religion to galvanize political support erodes the secular foundation of the Republic, fostering division rather than unity.

The need of the hour is a recommitment to the constitutional values that underpin our democracy. Respect for the fundamental rights of all citizens, irrespective of their faith, is non-negotiable. The judiciary must tread cautiously, ensuring that its actions do not inadvertently fuel communal discord. At the same time, the government must break its silence and unequivocally uphold the principles of secularism and justice. By addressing these issues with transparency and resolve, the state can allay fears and reaffirm its commitment to the constitutional promise of equality and religious freedom.

Ultimately, the practice of religion should be confined to the private sphere, free from the interference of politics and the machinations of vested interests. By doing so, religion can serve as a force for good, fostering community welfare and personal fulfillment. The intertwining of religion and politics, however, transforms it into a weapon of division, threatening the very fabric of the Republic. It is incumbent upon all stakeholders—courts, governments, and citizens—to ensure that the sanctity of religious freedom is preserved, and the wounds of the past are allowed to heal. Only then can India truly realize the vision of its Constitution: a secular, inclusive, and harmonious society.

Editorial

 As we unveil the first issue of our bilingual online literary magazine, it is with immense pride and a profound sense of purpose that we take this small yet significant step towards creating a vibrant platform for diverse voices in Punjabi and Hindi. This initiative is not just a magazine; it is a confluence of ideas, emotions, and perspectives, aiming to bridge generations, geographies, and genres. It is our belief that literature is a mirror to society, reflecting its triumphs, struggles, and aspirations. With this in mind, we strive to offer a space where creativity can flourish, voices can be heard, and dialogue can thrive.

This magazine aspires to celebrate the rich tapestry of our linguistic and literary heritage while also embracing the contemporary pulse of our times. By presenting a blend of articles, stories, mini-stories, and poems, we aim to cater to readers with varied tastes and sensibilities. The essence of this magazine lies in its inclusivity, as it brings together established literary stalwarts and emerging voices. The younger generation, with their fresh ideas and innovative approaches, will find equal footing alongside seasoned writers who carry the wisdom of experience. This deliberate curation reflects our commitment to nurturing new talent while honoring the masters of the craft.

In an era where digital platforms dominate the literary landscape, the need for a bilingual magazine becomes all the more pertinent. The inclusion of Punjabi and Hindi underscores our dedication to preserving the cultural essence of these languages, which have been a repository of human experience for centuries. These languages, with their deep-rooted traditions and evolving expressions, deserve a platform that highlights their richness and relevance in today’s rapidly changing world. Our aim is to inspire a sense of pride in our linguistic heritage while fostering a modern sensibility that resonates with readers of all ages.

The themes we explore will not be limited to the realms of imagination and emotion but will also delve into the pressing realities of our times. Political issues, especially those that dominate public discourse as burning topics, will find a prominent place in our magazine. Literature has always been a powerful tool for social and political commentary, and we intend to carry forward this legacy. By including thought-provoking essays and critical pieces on current affairs, we aim to spark meaningful discussions and encourage readers to engage with the complexities of the world around them. Our magazine seeks to be a forum where ideas collide and coexist, paving the way for intellectual growth and awareness.

At the heart of this endeavor is the conviction that literature has the power to transform, to heal, and to connect. In a society often divided by language, region, and ideology, we hope this magazine serves as a unifying force, reminding us of our shared humanity. The stories we tell, the poems we read, and the articles we reflect upon have the potential to dissolve boundaries and build bridges. They remind us that while our experiences may be unique, our emotions are universal.

For the young authors contributing to this magazine, we see this as an opportunity for them to not only showcase their talent but also to learn and grow under the guidance of established writers. The collaborative spirit of this initiative aims to foster mentorship, dialogue, and the exchange of ideas, enriching the literary journey of both the novice and the veteran. We encourage young writers to push boundaries, experiment with form and style, and use their voices fearlessly to tell the stories that matter to them.

As we embark on this journey, we are acutely aware of the responsibility that comes with it. The power of the written word cannot be underestimated, and with this magazine, we hope to contribute to a literary tradition that is both timeless and timely. Each issue will be a labor of love, a testament to the creativity and resilience of writers who dare to dream and to document the world as they see it. We are committed to upholding the highest standards of literary excellence while remaining accessible and relatable to our readers.

This first issue is not just a beginning; it is a promise—a promise to remain true to our vision, to listen to our readers, and to evolve with the changing times. We invite you, our valued readers, to join us on this journey, to share your thoughts, and to contribute your voices to this vibrant tapestry. Together, we can create a literary space that celebrates diversity, fosters creativity, and inspires change. With your support and participation, this magazine can become more than a publication; it can become a movement, a community, and a testament to the enduring power of language and literature.

As you turn the pages of this inaugural issue, we hope you find stories that resonate with you, poems that stir your soul, and articles that challenge your perspectives. This is just the beginning of what we hope will be a long and rewarding journey. Thank you for being a part of it, and welcome to our shared world of words, ideas, and imagination.

Monday, December 9, 2024

How the Supreme Court Hears Cases - A Complex Balance of Justice and Efficiency

The Supreme Court of India (SC) stands as the guardian of the Constitution, a symbol of justice, and the ultimate arbiter in the country. Every year, thousands of cases are filed, adding to an already massive backlog. This poses a critical question: How does the apex court decide which cases to prioritize?

Deciding Priorities 

To manage the burgeoning docket, the SC adopts specific strategies for prioritizing cases. Recently, under Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, the focus has shifted to addressing special leave petitions (SLPs) pending at the admission stage. These are appeals requiring the SC’s leave for a detailed hearing. By dedicating Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays to these cases, the court aims to either admit or dismiss them quickly, clearing the path for regular hearings. 

This streamlined approach limits detailed hearings to Mondays and Fridays, known as "Miscellaneous days," when fresh cases are heard. With over 82,000 cases currently pending, prioritizing SLPs offers a practical means to reduce the load efficiently. Historically, only 14% of SLPs are admitted, and each such admission decision averages just 1 minute and 33 seconds.

Weekly Schedule and Pendency Management 

Under the CJI’s new schedule, cases that require quick decisions, such as "after notice miscellaneous matters," take precedence. These cases often involve shorter hearings and can be resolved swiftly. By contrast, regular hearing matters, which require extensive arguments and deliberations, are addressed later, despite their years-long pendency. While this approach speeds up the disposal of newer cases, it adds to the waiting time for older, more complex matters.

Evolving Approaches by CJIs 

Each CJI brings a unique strategy to pendency management. Justice D Y Chandrachud, for instance, prioritized long-pending regular hearing and Constitution Bench matters, reducing regular case pendency significantly during his tenure. His predecessor, Justice U U Lalit, also emphasized clearing constitutional matters. In contrast, CJI Khanna’s focus on admission-stage cases reflects an ongoing experiment to find the best balance.

The Journey of a Case 

A case’s journey in the SC begins with filing by an Advocate-on-Record (AoR), who submits necessary documents through the court’s e-Filing portal or at a filing counter. The Registry, an administrative wing of the court, verifies documents, assigns a diary number, and ensures defects are cured within stipulated timeframes. Once listed, the case undergoes various stages—from “fresh” to "after notice miscellaneous" to "regular hearing" matters—before reaching a final verdict.

The SC’s Registry, divided into judicial and administrative wings, plays a pivotal role in managing these processes. It ensures seamless coordination, allowing the judiciary to focus on its primary function of dispensing justice.

Balancing Justice and Efficiency 

The Supreme Court’s dynamic scheduling reflects a constant effort to balance timely justice delivery with addressing the backlog. While prioritizing SLPs clears immediate hurdles, regular hearing matters—often pending for years—demand sustained attention. The court’s ability to adapt, innovate, and streamline its procedures ensures that the scales of justice remain balanced, even amid overwhelming challenges.

 

 

Sunday, December 8, 2024

The Fly by Katherine Mansfield

“Y’are very snug in here,” piped old Mr. Woodifield, and he peered out of the great, green-leather armchair by his friend the boss’s desk as a baby peers out of its pram. His talk was over; it was time for him to be off. But he did not want to go. Since he had retired, since his . . . stroke, the wife and the girls kept him boxed up in the house every day of the week except Tuesday. On Tuesday he was dressed and brushed and allowed to cut back to the City for the day. Though what he did there the wife and girls couldn’t imagine. Made a nuisance of himself to his friends, they supposed. . . . Well, perhaps so. All the same, we cling to our last pleasures as the tree clings to its last leaves. So there sat old Woodifield, smoking a cigar and staring almost greedily at the boss, who rolled in his office chair, stout, rosy, five years older than he, and still going strong, still at the helm. It did one good to see him.

Wistfully, admiringly, the old voice added, “It’s snug in here, upon my word!”

“Yes, it’s comfortable enough,” agreed the boss, and he flipped the Financial Times with a paper-knife. As a matter of fact he was proud of his room; he liked to have it admired, especially by old Woodifield. It gave him a feeling of deep, solid satisfaction to be planted there in the midst of it in full view of that frail old figure in the muffler.

“I’ve had it done up lately,” he explained, as he had explained for the past—how many?—weeks. “New carpet,” and he pointed to the bright red carpet with a pattern of large white rings. “New furniture,” and he nodded towards the massive bookcase and the table with legs like twisted treacle. “Electric heating!” He waved almost exultantly towards the five transparent, pearly sausages glowing so softly in the tilted copper pan.

But he did not draw old Woodifield’s attention to the photograph over the table of a grave-looking boy in uniform standing in one of those spectral photographers’ parks with photographers’ storm-clouds behind him. It was not new. It had been there for over six years.

“There was something I wanted to tell you,” said old Woodifield, and his eyes grew dim remembering. “Now what was it? I had it in my mind when I started out this morning.” His hands began to tremble, and patches of red showed above his beard.

Poor old chap, he’s on his last pins, thought the boss. And, feeling kindly, he winked at the old man, and said jokingly, “I tell you what. I’ve got a little drop of something here that’ll do you good before you go out into the cold again. It’s beautiful stuff. It wouldn’t hurt a child.” He took a key off his watch-chain, unlocked a cupboard below his desk, and drew forth a dark, squat bottle. “That’s the medicine,” said he. “And the man from whom I got it told me on the strict Q.T. it came from the cellars at Windsor Castle.”

Old Woodifield’s mouth fell open at the sight. He couldn’t have looked more surprised if the boss had produced a rabbit.

“It’s whisky, ain’t it?” he piped feebly.

The boss turned the bottle and lovingly showed him the label. Whisky it was.

“D’you know,” said he, peering up at the boss wonderingly, “they won’t let me touch it at home.” And he looked as though he was going to cry.

“Ah, that’s where we know a bit more than the ladies,” cried the boss, swooping across for two tumblers that stood on the table with the water-bottle, and pouring a generous finger into each. “Drink it down. It’ll do you good. And don’t put any water with it. It’s sacrilege to tamper with stuff like this. Ah!” He tossed off his, pulled out his handkerchief, hastily wiped his moustaches, and cocked an eye at old Woodifield, who was rolling his in his chaps.

The old man swallowed, was silent a moment, and then said faintly, “It’s nutty!

But it warmed him; it crept into his chill old brain—he remembered.

“That was it," he said, heaving himself out of his chair. “I thought you’d like to know. The girls were in Belgium last week having a look at poor Reggie’s grave, and they happened to come across your boy’s. They’re quite near each other, it seems.

Old Woodifield paused, but the boss made no reply. Only a quiver in his eyelids showed that he heard.

“The girls were delighted with the way the place is kept,” piped the old voice. “Beautifully looked after. Couldn’t be better if they were at home. You’ve not been across, have yer?

“No, no!” For various reasons the boss had not been across.

“There’s miles of it,” quavered old Woodifield, “and it’s all as neat as a garden. Flowers growing on all the graves. Nice broad paths.” It was plain from his voice how much he liked a nice broad path.

The pause came again. Then the old man brightened wonderfully.

“D’you know what the hotel made the girls pay for a pot of jam?” he piped. “Ten francs! Robbery, I call it. It was a little pot, so Gertrude says, no bigger than a half-crown. And she hadn’t taken more than a spoonful when they charged her ten francs. Gertrude brought the pot away with her to teach ’em a lesson. Quite right, too; it’s trading on our feelings. They think because we’re over there having a look round we’re ready to pay anything. That’s what it is.” And he turned towards the door.

“Quite right, quite right!” cried the boss, though what was quite right he hadn’t the least idea. He came round by his desk, followed the shuffling footsteps to the door, and saw the old fellow out. Woodifield was gone.

For a long moment the boss stayed, staring at nothing, while the grey-haired office messenger, watching him, dodged in and out of his cubby-hole like a dog that expects to be taken for a run. Then: “I’ll see nobody for half an hour, Macey," said the boss. “Understand? Nobody at all.”

“Very good, sir.”

The door shut, the firm heavy steps recrossed the bright carpet, the fat body plumped down in the spring chair, and leaning forward, the boss covered his face with his hands. He wanted, he intended, he had arranged to weep. . . . 

It had been a terrible shock to him when old Woodifield sprang that remark upon him about the boy’s grave. It was exactly as though the earth had opened and he had seen the boy lying there with Woodifield’s girls staring down at him. For it was strange. Although over six years had passed away, the boss never thought of the boy except as lying unchanged, unblemished in his uniform, asleep for ever. “My son!” groaned the boss. But no tears came yet. In the past, in the first few months and even years after the boy’s death, he had only to say those words to be overcome by such grief that nothing short of a violent fit of weeping could relieve him. Time, he had declared then, he had told everybody, could make no difference. Other men perhaps might recover, might live their loss down, but not he. How was it possible? His boy was an only son. Ever since his birth the boss had worked at building up this business for him; it had no other meaning if it was not for the boy. Life itself had come to have no other meaning. How on earth could he have slaved, denied himself, kept going all those years without the promise for ever before him of the boy’s stepping into his shoes and carrying on where he left off?

And that promise had been so near being fulfilled. The boy had been in the office learning the ropes for a year before the war. Every morning they had started off together; they had come back by the same train. And what congratulations he had received as the boy’s father! No wonder; he had taken to it marvellously. As to his popularity with the staff, every man jack of them down to old Macey couldn’t make enough of the boy. And he wasn’t the least spoilt. No, he was just his bright natural self, with the right word for everybody, with that boyish look and his habit of saying, “Simply splendid!”

But all that was over and done with as though it never had been. The day had come when Macey had handed him the telegram that brought the whole place crashing about his head. “Deeply regret to inform you . . . ” And he had left the office a broken man, with his life in ruins.

Six years ago, six years. . . . How quickly time passed! It might have happened yesterday. The boss took his hands from his face; he was puzzled. Something seemed to be wrong with him. He wasn’t feeling as he wanted to feel. He decided to get up and have a look at the boy’s photograph. But it wasn’t a favourite photograph of his; the expression was unnatural. It was cold, even stern-looking. The boy had never looked like that.

At that moment the boss noticed that a fly had fallen into his broad inkpot, and was trying feebly but desperately to clamber out again. Help! help! said those struggling legs. But the sides of the inkpot were wet and slippery; it fell back again and began to swim. The boss took up a pen, picked the fly out of the ink, and shook it on to a piece of blotting-paper. For a fraction of a second it lay still on the dark patch that oozed round it. Then the front legs waved, took hold, and, pulling its small, sodden body up, it began the immense task of cleaning the ink from its wings. Over and under, over and under, went a leg along a wing, as the stone goes over and under the scythe. Then there was a pause, while the fly, seeming to stand on the tips of its toes, tried to expand first one wing and then the other. It succeeded at last, and, sitting down, it began, like a minute cat, to clean its face. Now one could imagine that the little front legs rubbed against each other lightly, joyfully. The horrible danger was over; it had escaped; it was ready for life again.

But just then the boss had an idea. He plunged his pen back into the ink, leaned his thick wrist on the blotting-paper, and as the fly tried its wings down came a great heavy blot. What would it make of that? What indeed! The little beggar seemed absolutely cowed, stunned, and afraid to move because of what would happen next. But then, as if painfully, it dragged itself forward. The front legs waved, caught hold, and, more slowly this time, the task began from the beginning.

He’s a plucky little devil, thought the boss, and he felt a real admiration for the fly’s courage. That was the way to tackle things; that was the right spirit. Never say die; it was only a question of . . . But the fly had again finished its laborious task, and the boss had just time to refill his pen, to shake fair and square on the new-cleaned body yet another dark drop. What about it this time? A painful moment of suspense followed. But behold, the front legs were again waving; the boss felt a rush of relief. He leaned over the fly and said to it tenderly, “You artful little b . . . ” And he actually had the brilliant notion of breathing on it to help the drying process. All the same, there was something timid and weak about its efforts now, and the boss decided that this time should be the last, as he dipped the pen deep into the inkpot.

It was. The last blot fell on the soaked blotting-paper, and the draggled fly lay in it and did not stir. The back legs were stuck to the body; the front legs were not to be seen.

“Come on,” said the boss. “Look sharp!” And he stirred it with his pen—in vain. Nothing happened or was likely to happen. The fly was dead.

The boss lifted the corpse on the end of the paper-knife and flung it into the waste-paper basket. But such a grinding feeling of wretchedness seized him that he felt positively frightened. He started forward and pressed the bell for Macey.

“Bring me some fresh blotting-paper,” he said sternly, “and look sharp about it.” And while the old dog padded away he fell to wondering what it was he had been thinking about before. What was it? It was . . . He took out his handkerchief and passed it inside his collar. For the life of him he could not remember.

×

Annotation 1 of 38