Class 11 English Unit 15: Shall there be Peace? Language Development Section
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iym8ytehffA
Unit 15 Shall there be Peace? (page 137)
Reflection of the text
Hermann Hesse wrote this essay in December 1917, during World War I, when leaders such as Wilson and Lloyd George vowed to continue fighting until “final victory.” In Italy, a Socialist named Mergari was mocked just for speaking about peace. Meanwhile, German officials denied any intention of offering peace again, claiming they had “no reason” to repeat their earlier offer. Hesse compares this attitude to crushing a blade of grass that tries to grow—every hope for peace is quickly destroyed.
At the same time, peace talks are starting in Brest-Litovsk between Russia and Germany. German representative Kühlmann even speaks of “peace on earth” at Christmas. But Hesse warns that politicians often use religious words without truly meaning them. The world is focused on two places: Brest-Litovsk, where peace might be possible, and the Western Front, where the most terrible battle in history is about to happen.
Hesse says most ordinary people fear this coming slaughter. Only a small number of political speakers and war profiteers want the war to continue. Leaders promise that a “final victory” will bring justice and humanitarian goals, but Hesse calls this idea absurd. He argues that the more destructive the battles are, the less likely they are to bring peace or reduce hatred. If one side “wins,” militarism will simply be strengthened.
He questions whether any new mass killing can be justified by the confused and contradictory goals of leaders. While Russia is courageously seeking peace, half the world is hungry, and much human work has stopped. Yet preparations for a huge battle in France continue. Hesse believes it is everyone’s moral duty to try to stop this final disaster—not just politicians. He criticizes ordinary people for being lazy, cowardly, and unwilling to think for themselves. Many silently accept war as a political tool, even though they hate it. Only a tiny minority truly wants war, yet it goes on because the majority does not take action. People admire Russia for laying down arms, but they do not follow that example. Leaders support peace only when it benefits them.
Hesse asks why no parliament or cabinet speaks up for the one idea that really matters now: ending the war. He says Europe is ruled by war itself—the “bloodiest and most ruthless” ruler. Since almost no one wants this, people must act. They should show readiness for peace, stop making provocative statements, and be willing to accept small humiliations or compromises if it will end the killing.
He urges removing leaders who only think in selfish national terms and ignore the common needs of humanity. Peace is already in people’s hearts. If everyone truly decides to work for peace and remove its obstacles, it can happen. Then people will feel proud to have helped, instead of feeling guilty for allowing war to continue.
Ways with words
A. Match the words on the left side with their meanings on the right.
Answers only:
a. proclaim declare
b. unswerving steady, or constant
c. magnanimous generous, or forgiving
d. trample crush
e. tremendous huge
f. inevitable unavoidable
g. dire dreadful
h. anguish distress
i. impending upcoming
j. ruthless pitiless
B. Fill in the blanks with the suitable word from the list given.
|
appalling sanguine slaughter absurdity futility reluctance bestir |
a. The soldiers suffer appalling injuries during the attack.
b. She is sanguine about prospects for the economic development of the country.
c. Innocent people get unexpectedly slaughtered in the war.
d. The crowd laughed at the absurdity of the singer’s behaviour.
e. The intellectuals should be worried about the horror and futility of war.
f. He sensed her reluctance to continue the work.
g. They bestir themselves at the first light of morning.
Comprehension
Answer these questions.
a. Why was the Italian Socialist Mergari treated like a madman?
The Italian Socialist, Mergari, was treated like a madman because of his natural human words.
b. Can political aims be attained by the criminal instrumentality of war? If yes, how?
Yes, the political aims can be attained by the criminal instrumentality of war because the political leaders can create a sense of love for the country in the public’s mind, and they can contribute their lives in favour of the political agenda.
c. Which hopes and plans were said to be mutually contradictory?
The hopes of peace negotiations in Brest-Litovsk between Germany and Russia and the plans of France to invade Germany are said to be mutually contradictory.
d. What can be the sacred duty of every man of goodwill on earth?
The sacred duty of every man of goodwill on earth is not to replace ourselves in indifferences and let things take their course, but should be aware of the future consequences of the present work.
e. Is it good to tacitly accept war as an instrument of politics? If not, what else should be done?
No, it is not good to tacitly accept war as an instrument of politics. Peace must be prioritized in society for a better human life, as only a minority of people benefit from war. A step must be taken for those who earn money by selling weapons.
f. How can we stop war in the world?
We can stop war in the world by raising our voice, being integrated, and joining hands together to remove the obstacles and barriers to peace. Everyone must be responsible for it.
g. What is the main message of this essay?
The main message of this essay is to preserve peace in society because peace is inevitable for human beings for survival.
***
Click for next: https://limbuchandrabahadur.blogspot.com/2025/12/class-11-english-unit-15-crtitcal.html


Post a Comment