1st PUC English Textbook Answers Reflections Chapter 1 The Gentlemen of the Jungle

You can Download Chapter 1 The Gentlemen of the Jungle Questions and Answers Pdf, Notes, Summary, 1st PUC English Textbook Answers, Karnataka State Board Solutions help you to revise complete Syllabus and score more marks in your examinations.

Karnataka 1st PUC English Textbook Answers Reflections Chapter 1 The Gentlemen of the Jungle

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Questions and Answers, Notes, Summary

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Comprehension I

Question 1.
What favour did the elephant ask the man on a rainy day?
OR
What was the request of the elephant to his friend on a rainy day?
OR
What was the elephant’s request to the man in ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’?
Answer:
The elephant asked the man if the man would let the elephant put his trunk inside the hut of the man in order to protect the trunk from the torrential rain.

Question 2.
According to the man, his hut had room only for him. True /False
Answer:
False.

Question 3.
How did the elephant sneak into the man’s hut?
Answer:
After putting the trunk inside the hut, the elephant slowly pushed his head inside and finally threw the man out of the hut, in the rain.

KSEEB Solutions

Question 4.
According to the elephant, the man can afford to remain in the rain because
(a) the skin of the man is harder than his.
(b) the skin of the elephant is delicate.
(c) the skin of the elephant is harder than that of man.
Answer:
(b) It’s not ‘a’ because the elephant doesn’t say that the skin of the man is harder than that of any other animal. The elephant only says that the skin of the man is harder than that of the elephant’s.

Question 5.
How did the lion decide to solve the problem?
OR
What did the king do to resolve the dispute between the man and the elephant?
Answer:
The lion decided to appoint an Imperial Commission/Commission of Enquiry for an enquiry to solve the problem of the man.

Question 6.
What kind of judgement did the man expect?
Answer:
The man thought that his hut would be returned to him and that justice would be done.

Question 7.
Why was the man unhappy with the members of the Commission of Enquiry?
Answer:
The man was unhappy with the members of the Commission of Enquiry because there was no representation from his side.

Question 8.
According to the elephant, the man had invited him into the hut
(a) to save his skin.
(b) to give shelter to his trunk.
(c) to save the hut from the hurricane.
(d) to fill the empty space in the hut.
Answer:
(c) to save the hut from the hurricane.

Question 9.
In whose favour was the judgement given?
Answer:
In favour of the elephant.

Question 10.
Why did the man accept the suggestion of building a new hut?
OR
What fear made the man accept the judgement of the Commission?
Answer:
The man had no alternative as he was afraid that his refusal to build another hut on another site would expose him to the teeth and claws of members of the Commission.

Question 11.
How did the man ‘buy’ peace finally?
Answer:
The man built a hut big enough to accommodate all the animals and when all the animals got inside the hut and started fighting among themselves, he burnt the hut along with all the lords of the jungle.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Comprehension II

Question 1.
Why was the Commission of Enquiry appointed by the king of the jungle?
OR
Why did the lion command his ministers to appoint a Commission of Enquiry?
Answer:
The king of the jungle claimed that he wanted peace and tranquillity in his kingdom. With his sweet words, he convinced the man that justice would be meted out to him through the findings of the Commission. Thus, the Commission of Enquiry was appointed by the king of the jungle under the pretext of doing justice to the man.

Question 2.
Why did the animals decide not to have anyone from the man’s side on the Commission of Enquiry?
OR
How did the members of the Commission of Enquiry justify their act of not including any man?
Answer:
The animals decided not to have anyone from the man’s side on the Commission of Enquiry based on the argument that there was no one well-educated from the man’s side to know the intricacies of the jungle law. However, the unstated truth is the fact that right from the beginning, the Commission had no intention of doing any justice to the man and hence had representatives only from the elephant’s side. Ironically, the elephant himself, against whom the case was registered, constituted the Commission along with the other ministers of the king.

Question 3.
How did the elephant justify its act of occupying the hut?
Answer:
The elephant had absolutely no qualms while justifying its territorial occupation of the man’s hut. It deposed before the Commission that the man had asked the elephant to save his hut from the hurricane and as the hurricane had gained access to the hut owing to the unoccupied space in the hut, the elephant had put the empty, undeveloped space to a more economic use by occupying it.

Question 4.
Do you think the verdict of the Commission of Enquiry was on expected lines? Why?
Answer:
As expected, the judgement was in favour of the elephant because all the members on the Commission were representatives from the elephant’s side. Moreover, none of the jungle representatives cared for justice. They were all selfish and hypocritical people, just as the jungle king lion himself was.

KSEEB Solutions

Question 5.
What fate awaited the man each time he built a new house?
Answer:
Each time the man built a new house, it was forcefully occupied by one or the other animal of the jungle kingdom. The man was thrown out of his own house. The man’s state was really pitiable because each time he was promised justice, but each time he was denied justice.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Comprehension III

Question 1.
Do you agree with the action of the man at the end? Why?
Answer:
The man’s action can be understood as justified retribution (vengeance, revenge, punishment). We must remember the fact that after having tried repeatedly for justice in a peaceful manner and only after being wronged repeatedly does the man go to the extreme extent of burning down the hut along with all the animals inside. Even here, the truth remains that if the animals hadn’t illegally occupied the hut which was not built by them, the tragic fate wouldn’t have fallen on them. Thus, in whichever angle we take, the man’s action can be understood and justified. We should remember that tolerating crime is as bad as committing it.

Question 2.
‘An act of kindness is misunderstood as weakness.’ Discuss this with reference to the story.
Answer:
The man’s act of kindness of letting the elephant put his trunk inside the hut in order to protect the trunk from the heavy rain is taken undue advantage of by the elephant. The elephant does not have the grace to understand an act of kindness and takes it as a sign of weakness. In its selfishness, it does great injustice to a friend who rises to the occasion in the true spirit of a friend in need. Further, the elephant takes recourse to the argument that other animals in his position would have done the same.

Question 3.
‘Peace is costly but it is worth the expense.’ What is the ironical significance of this statement?
Answer:
The words ‘Peace is costly but it is worth the expense’ are ironically used because the man had to lose his huts repeatedly before he finally overcame his enemies with a ruse (plot, trick). Ordinarily, we do not talk in terms of money when we talk of peace. But, in the case of the man, peace gets linked to his property. In terms of colonisation too peace gets linked to wealth because the natives are colonised for their wealth by the colonisers. However, the urge for freedom remains alive in the hearts of the colonised and all the sacrifices made will be considered worthy of the effort.

Question 4.
Every fable ends with a moral. What ‘moral’ do you find in this story?
Answer:
The moral of this fable lies in the warning given to the powerful animals. It is clearly seen that the meek can overcome the mighty if the meek are pushed against the wall. If the mighty think that they can continue unabated in their wrongdoing, they will be proved wrong by the meek.

Question 5.
Do you think the story can be read as a political satire on colonialism?
OR
‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’ is a political satire on colonialism. Elucidate.
Answer:
It is clear that the story is an allegory with a moral. The world of animals is pitted against the man to suggest that among human beings, some are like animals in their cruelty. It is definitely a political satire which shows the devious (cunning) and selfish ways of the colonisers in their relationship with the natives. The story mocks at the supercilious (arrogant) attitudes of the colonisers who think that it is their duty to reform the backward natives. They justify all their selfish acts by covering up their selfish deeds with the argument that they have been sent by God himself for the good deed. The author uses terms like ‘better economic use’ to suggest the trade and commerce the colonisers established in the colonised country.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Additional Questions and Answers

I. Answer the following questions in a word, a phrase or a sentence each:

Question 1.
Where had the man built his hut in ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’?
OR
Where was the man’s hut located in the forest?
Answer:
At the edge of the forest.

KSEEB Solutions

Question 2.
What did the elephant wish to protect from the hailstorm?
Answer:
It’s trunk.

Question 3.
What did the elephant do to the man after putting his trunk and head inside the hut?
OR
What did the elephant do after it occupied the hut?
OR
Where did the elephant fling the man?
Answer:
It flung the man out in the rain.

Question 4.
What did the lion wish to have in his kingdom?
Answer:
Peace and tranquillity.

Question 5.
Who commanded the ministers to appoint a Commission of Enquiry?
Answer:
The lion king.

Question 6.
Why was no human being included in the Commission of Enquiry?
Answer:
They were not educated enough to understand the intricacies of jungle law.

Question 7.
Who appointed the members of the Commission?
Answer:
The elephant and the other ministers.

Question 8.
Who was the chairman of the Commission of Enquiry?
OR
Who was appointed the chairperson of the Commission of Enquiry in ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’?
Answer:
Mr Fox.

Question 9.
Name any two members of the Commission of Enquiry.
Answer:
Mr Rhinoceros and Mr Buffalo.

Question 10.
Who was called first by the Commission to give evidence?
Answer:
Mr Elephant.

Question 11.
At whose expense did the members of the Imperial Commission have a delicious meal?
OR
Who provided the delicious meal to the Members of the Commission?
Answer:
The elephant.

Question 12.
In whose favour did the Commission of Enquiry give the verdict?
Answer:
The Commission gave its verdict in favour of the elephant.

Question 13.
Who was the first to occupy the bigger and better hut built by the man?
Answer:
Mr Elephant.

Question 14.
Who occupied the second hut that was built by the man?
Answer:
Mr Rhinoceros.

Question 15.
Who was the secretary of the Commission of Enquiry?
Answer:
Mr Leopard.

KSEEB Solutions

Question 16.
Who made friendship with the man?
Answer:
The elephant.

Question 17.
Why did the elephant approach the man for help?
Answer:
The elephant approached the man for help because it wanted to shelter its trunk from the torrential rain pouring outside.

Question 18.
What did the elephant promise to repay the man for his help?
Answer:
The elephant promised to return the man’s kindness.

Question 19.
What did the elephant want to protect his skin from?
Answer:
The elephant wanted to protect its delicate skin from the hailstorm.

Question 20.
“I have always regarded it as my duty to protect the interests of my friends” was said by the
(a) elephant
(b) lion
(c) man.
Answer:
(a) elephant.

Question 21.
What did the elephant always regard his duty?
Answer:
The elephant always regarded protecting the interests of his friends as his duty.

Question 22.
What was the only question asked to the man by the Commission of Enquiry?
Answer:
The only question the man was asked by the Commission of Enquiry was whether the undeveloped space in his hut was occupied by anyone else before Mr Elephant assumed his position.

Question 23.
What were the members of the Commission of Enquiry reputed for?
Answer:
The members of the Commission of Enquiry were reputed for their impartiality injustice.

Question 24.
The elephant wanted to put the space in the man’s hut to more economic use.
(a) occupied
(b) unoccupied
(c) cultivated
Answer:
(b) unoccupied.

KSEEB Solutions

Question 25.
What did the elephant want to turn the undeveloped space into?
Answer:
The elephant wanted to turn the undeveloped space into more economic use.

Question 26.
What kind of hut did the man build, finally?
Answer:
The man finally built a bigger and better hut a little distance away.

Question 27.
The dispute and fight among the gentlemen of the jungle was for the rights of
(a) occupation
(b) penetration
(c) freedom.
Answer:
(b) penetration.

Question 28.
According to the man, _______ is costly, but it’s worth the expense.
(Fill in the blank with the right word from the text)
Answer:
peace

II. Answer the following questions in 80 – 100 words each:

Question 1.
What injustice was done to the man every time he built a new house?
OR
How did the animals exploit the man each time he built a new hut?
Answer:
Even after the complete injustice done to the man by displacing him from his own hut, the animals do not grow kind towards him. The man, finding no use of complaining, moves away and builds for himself another hut. But, the new hut he builds is also taken by Mr Rhinoceros, another animal on the Commission, and the same unjust verdict, as in the case of the elephant usurping the man’s hut, awaits the man this time also. All the huts he builds are usurped by other members on the Commission: Mr Buffalo, Mr Leopard and Mr Hyena. The animals which thus enjoy the fruits of the labour of the man are allegoric representations of the colonisers who enjoyed all kinds of luxury at the cost of the natives.

Question 2.
Describe the circumstances that led to the appointment of the Commission of Enquiry.
Answer:
‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’ by Jomo Kenyatta presents the disturbing situation of a kind man being punished for his kindness. The man in question allows an elephant, his friend, to put his trunk inside the man’s hut to protect it from the rain. But, the elephant exploits the goodness of the man and throws him out of the hut. When the wronged man starts arguing with the elephant, the confusion attracts many animals from the nearby jungle, including The Lion King who is displeased that the peace of his jungle is disturbed by the misunderstanding between the man and the elephant.

The elephant, one of the ministers of the king, pacifies the Lion King by assuring him that there is no threat to peace and that he was just having a discussion with his friend. The Lion King pleased that the man is a friend of the animals, assures him that his hut is not lost to him and that he would get it back depending upon the findings of a Commission that would be appointed to look into the matter.
The man feels happy that the Lion King is fair and is willing to settle the matter by placing it before a Commission.

Question 2.
How did the man finally outwit the gentlemen of the jungle?
OR
How did the man secure justice for himself, in ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’?
OR
How did the man finally buy peace, in ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’?
Answer:
After being repeatedly pushed out of his own huts, the man thinks of a plan to safeguard his rights. He knows that he cannot put up a fight against the powerful animals. Hence, he decides to make them taste their own medicine. He builds a hut which is big enough to accommodate all the animals. As he had expected, all animals, including Mr Lion, come to the hut and soon there ensues a fight among all. Making use of the opportunity, the man sets his hut on fire and along with the hut, all animals gathered in it are also dead. What the man couldn’t achieve by using muscle power, he achieves by using brainpower. Thus, the man gets justice by taking law into his own hands.

Question 3.
What is the moral of the story ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’?
OR
What is Jomo Kenyatta’s message to the readers?
Answer:
Jomo Kenyatta’s message in ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’ is clear. He doesn’t mince words to suggest that if righteousness fails, the wicked should be tackled by taking recourse to devious ways. As it happens in contemporary society, we see that the rich and the powerful can buy justice and the poor man is denied his rights. His exploitation continues unabated for a while. But, as history has shown, when the haves exploits the have-nots, sooner or later there will be a revolt of the underdogs of society. Often such revolts have been bloody. Likewise, we see that when the man cannot get justice through proper legal ways, he uses a cunning trick. All the animals dig their own graves because they do not know how to contain their greed. The man’s victory is a warning to the selfish and the powerful. Jomo Kenyatta makes it clear that the mighty perish in their own might and the slain survives the slayer.

KSEEB Solutions

Question 4.
What did the man finally do in order to get justice?
0R
Why did the man finally set the newly built bigger hut on fire, in ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’?
Answer:
After being repeatedly pushed out of his own huts, the man thinks of a plan to safeguard his rights. He knows that he cannot put up a fight against the powerful animals. Hence, he decides to give them a taste of their own medicine. He builds a hut which is big enough to accommodate all the animals. As he had expected, all animals, including Mr Lion, come to the hut and soon there ensues a fight among all. Making use of the opportunity, the man sets his hut on fire and along with the hut, all animals gathered in it are also dead. What the man couldn’t achieve by using muscle power, he achieves by using the brainpower. Thus, the man gets justice by taking law into his own hands.

Question 5.
How was the man deceived by the elephant?
OR
How did the elephant trick the man to gain entry into his hut and push him out?
Answer:
The elephant asked the man if the man would let the elephant put his trunk inside the hut of the man in order to protect the trunk from the torrential rain. After putting the trunk inside the hut, the elephant slowly pushed his head inside and finally threw the man out of the hut, in the rain. Thus we see the selfless act of a man who allowed his friend – the elephant – to put his trunk inside his hut when there was heavy rain, getting rebuffed. The elephant, instead of remaining grateful, encroached upon the hut of the man and threw him out.

Question 6.
How did the elephant cheat the man and occupy his hut?
Answer:
Once upon a time an elephant made friendship with a man, who had a little hut at the edge of the forest. One day a heavy thunderstorm broke out and the elephant felt like taking shelter in a hut. The elephant went to the man’s hut and requested him to let him put its trunk inside the hut so as to shelter it from the torrential rain. The man took pity on the elephant and told the elephant to gently put only its trunk inside the hut. But, the elephant, soon after putting its trunk inside the hut, slowly pushed its head also inside, flung the man out in the rain and then lay down comfortably inside his hut.

III. Answer the following questions in 200 words each:

Question 1.
“You can fool people for a time, but not forever”. Explain this statement in the context of the story.
Answer:
The statement, ‘You can fool people for a time, but not forever’, is a time-tested maxim/saying.
The protagonist in this story gives a fitting reply to those who think that he is gullible and can be easily fooled. The protagonist lived in a hut at the edge of the forest. Once, on a stormy day, one of his friends in the jungle – the elephant – approached him for shelter. It requested him to let him put his trunk inside the hut so that he could prevent it from getting wet in the rain.

The man, who sympathized with the elephant, told him that his hut being small, there was only room enough for its trunk and himself. Therefore, he told the elephant to put its trunk in gently. However, the elephant took the man’s tolerance as a sign of weakness and pushing its head inside the hut, threw the man out in the rain. The man started to grumble, and the animals in the nearby forest gathered there to see what the matter was. There ensued a heated argument between the man and the elephant. On hearing the noise, the lion, the king of the forest, came along. Then it ordered an Enquiry Commission to be set up to examine their claims. Since there was no member from his side in the Commission, the man lost his case and he was asked to build a new hut to suit his needs. The man built another hut, which was forcibly occupied by the rhinoceros.

Once again another Commission of Enquiry was appointed and the man got the same judgment. This way the man built several huts one after the other, and all of his huts were forcibly taken over by the animals. Finally, the man thought over this matter deeply and hit upon a plan. He realized that if he is careful enough he can trap them in their own game. He built a bigger and better hut a little distance away. No sooner had the rhinoceros seen it, than he came rushing in, only to find that the elephant had already become an inmate. Then all the other animals came in one by one and finally started fighting for a place inside the hut. While the animals were thus busy fighting, the man set the hut on fire as planned and burnt it to the ground along with the animals. Though the animals fooled the man many times considering his tolerance as a weakness, the man outsmarted them eventually. Thus, this story undoubtedly proves that “you can fool people for a time, but not forever”.

KSEEB Solutions

Question 2.
Explain briefly the trial and the judgment of the case between the man and the elephant.
Answer:
On a stormy day, the elephant approached the man to let him put his trunk inside the hut so as f to prevent it from getting wet in the rain. The man, being kind and sympathetic, told the elephant that there was only room enough for himself and its trunk. He told the elephant to put its trunk in gently.

The elephant, seeing the man’s naivety, took his tolerance as ‘weakness’ and, pushing its head inside, flung the man out in the rain. Then it lay down comfortably inside his hut. The man protested and started to grumble. A heated argument ensued between the man and the elephant. In this turmoil, the lion came along roaring and warned the animals not to disturb the peace of his kingdom. The elephant told the king that he was only having a little discussion with his friend about taking possession of the f hut which he was occupying. The lion ordered his ministers to appoint a Commission of Enquiry to examine their claims and to report accordingly.

A Commission of Enquiry comprising some of the animals as members was soon constituted. On seeing the members, the man protested and demanded that a member from his side also be included. But his plea was rejected on the ground that no one on his side was educated enough to understand the intricacy of jungle law.

During the trial, Mr Elephant stated that he has always regarded it as his duty to protect the interests of his friends and that seemed to have caused the misunderstanding between himself and his friend. Then he submitted before the Commission that his friend had requested him (the elephant) to save his hut from being blown away by a hurricane.

Next, he stated that as the hurricane had entered the hut because of the unoccupied space in the hut, he considered it necessary to turn the undeveloped space to a more economic use by sitting in it himself. After hearing the elephant’s statement, the Commission listened to the statements given by the other animals of the forest. Then they called the man to state his account of the dispute. However, the Commission restrained him from narrating the whole story and asked him to only tell them whether the undeveloped space in his hut had been occupied by anyone else before Mr Elephant occupied it. But even before the man began his reply the Commission declared that they had heard sufficient evidence from both sides and retired to consider their decision.

After enjoying a delicious meal at the expense of the elephant, they declared their verdict. They stated that Mr Elephant has fulfilled his sacred duty of protecting the man’s interests. Further, they said that as it was clear that the man was not able to put the space in his hut to economic use, it was necessary to arrange a compromise to suit both parties. Therefore, they decreed that the elephant should continue its occupation of his hut and they would give him permission to look for a site where he could build another hut suited to his needs.

The members of the Commission of Enquiry were well-versed in jungle law which advocated the maxims ‘might is right’ and ‘survival of the fittest’. On the contrary, the man believed in resolving conflicts through open discussion and mutual respect and co-operation. This being the case, the Enquiry Commission members being animals of the forest, clearly understood that the man can only grumble and protest but cannot do anything physically to evict the elephant from his hut. Therefore, the members considered his tolerance as weakness and approved the elephant’s action as correct and decreed in its favour.

Question 3.
The men’s tolerance was considered as weakness by the members of the Commission of Enquiry. Do you agree? Elaborate.
Answer:
On a stormy day, the elephant approached the man to let him put his trunk inside the hut so as f to prevent it from getting wet in the rain. The man, being kind and sympathetic, told the elephant that there was only room enough for himself and its trunk. He told the elephant to put its trunk in gently.

The elephant, seeing the man’s naivety, took his tolerance as ‘weakness’ and, pushing its head inside, flung the man out in the rain. Then it lay down comfortably inside his hut. The man protested and started to grumble. A heated argument ensued between the man and the elephant. In this turmoil, the lion came along roaring and warned the animals not to disturb the peace of his kingdom. The elephant told the king that he was only having a little discussion with his friend about taking possession of the f hut which he was occupying. The lion ordered his ministers to appoint a Commission of Enquiry to examine their claims and to report accordingly.

A Commission of Enquiry comprising some of the animals as members was soon constituted. On seeing the members, the man protested and demanded that a member from his side also be included. But his plea was rejected on the ground that no one on his side was educated enough to understand the intricacy of jungle law.

During the trial, Mr Elephant stated that he has always regarded it as his duty to protect the interests of his friends and that seemed to have caused the misunderstanding between himself and his friend. Then he submitted before the Commission that his friend had requested him (the elephant) to save his hut from being blown away by a hurricane.

Next, he stated that as the hurricane had entered the hut because of the unoccupied space in the hut, he considered it necessary to turn the undeveloped space to a more economic use by sitting in it himself. After hearing the elephant’s statement, the Commission listened to the statements given by the other animals of the forest. Then they called the man to state his account of the dispute. However, the Commission restrained him from narrating the whole story and asked him to only tell them whether the undeveloped space in his hut had been occupied by anyone else before Mr Elephant occupied it. But even before the man began his reply the Commission declared that they had heard sufficient evidence from both sides and retired to consider their decision.

KSEEB Solutions

After enjoying a delicious meal at the expense of the elephant, they declared their verdict. They stated that Mr Elephant has fulfilled his sacred duty of protecting the man’s interests. Further, they said that as it was clear that the man was not able to put the space in his hut to economic use, it was necessary to arrange a compromise to suit both parties. Therefore, they decreed that the elephant should continue its occupation of his hut and they would give him permission to look for a site where he could build another hut suited to his needs.

The members of the Commission of Enquiry were well-versed in jungle law which advocated the maxims ‘might is right’ and ‘survival of the fittest’. On the contrary, the man believed in resolving conflicts through open discussion and mutual respect and co-operation. This being the case, the Enquiry Commission members being animals of the forest, clearly understood that the man can only grumble and protest but cannot do anything physically to evict the elephant from his hut. Therefore, the members considered his tolerance as weakness and approved the elephant’s action as correct and decreed in its favour.

Question 4.
The onslaught of the animals on the man, time and again, marks the ‘European expansion’. Comment with reference to the story.
Answer:
‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’ is a short story by Jomo Kenyatta. This story is both a fable and an allegory which symbolically re-enacts the European colonization of Africa.

The story has a simple plot. Once there lived a man in a little hut at the edge of the forest. An elephant, which had made friends with him, approached him for help on a stormy day. He requested him to let him put his trunk inside his hut so that he can shelter it from getting wet in the rain. Showing sympathy for the elephant, the man asked the elephant to put his trunk in gently. But the elephant soon after putting his trunk inside the hut slowly pushed his head also inside and finally flung the man out. The man grumbled in protest and there ensued a heated argument between him and the elephant.

On hearing the heated argument between the man and the elephant, the lion came roaring and made enquiries. The elephant told the lion that he had occupied the empty space in the man’s hut only to save him from being blown away by the hurricane. The lion got a Commission of Enquiry appointed to examine their dispute. However, the Commission had no ‘human’ members to represent the ‘man’. When the man complained about it, they silenced him saying that no one from his side was educated enough to understand the intricacy of ‘Jungle Law’. The Commission gave out a biased judgement favouring the elephant and permitted the man to build another hut on another site.

Since the man had no alternative but to obey their orders, he built another hut. But no sooner had he built it than Mr Rhinoceros charged in with his horn lowered and ordered the man to quit. Again, another Commission of Enquiry was appointed to look into the matter. Once again, a biased judgement favouring the Rhinoceros was given. This procedure was repeated until all the animals were accommodated with new huts and the man, who had actually built the huts, was expelled from his huts.

This story ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’ parodies to a great extent the drama of European expansion and colonization that took place between the 16th and 19th centuries. ‘The man’ in this storey symbolically represents the African natives and the animals of the jungle represent the European powers. Like the animals in the jungle, the European powers occupied different parts of Africa and eventually controlled them politically. During this period, European powers notably Britain, Portugal, France, Germany, Belgium and Italy claimed vast areas of Africa and Asia. They established full or partial political control over those areas creating colonies, occupying them as settlers and exploiting them economically.

Question 5.
The animals were cunning, but the man outsmarted them eventually. Elucidate.
Answer:
The statement, ‘You can fool people for a time, but not forever’, is a time-tested maxim/saying.
The protagonist in this story gives a fitting reply to those who think that he is gullible and can be easily fooled. The protagonist lived in a hut at the edge of the forest. Once, on a stormy day, one of his friends in the jungle – the elephant – approached him for shelter. It requested him to let him put his trunk inside the hut so that he could prevent it from getting wet in the rain. The man, who sympathized with the elephant, told him that his hut being small, there was only room enough for its trunk and himself. Therefore, he told the elephant to put its trunk in gently.

KSEEB Solutions

However, the elephant took the man’s tolerance as a sign of weakness and pushing its head inside the hut, threw the man out in the rain. The man started to grumble, and the animals in the nearby forest gathered there to see what the matter was. There ensued a heated argument between the man and the elephant. On hearing the noise, the lion, the king of the forest, came along. Then it ordered an Enquiry Commission to be set up to examine their claims. Since there was no member from his side in the Commission, the man lost his case and he was asked to build a new hut to suit his needs. The man built another hut, which was forcibly occupied by the rhinoceros. Once again another Commission of Enquiry was appointed and the man got the same judgment. This way the man built several huts one after the other, and all of his huts were forcibly taken over by the animals.

Finally, the man thought over this matter deeply and hit upon a plan. He realized that if he is careful enough he can trap them in their own game. He built a bigger and better hut a little distance away. No sooner had the rhinoceros seen it, than he came rushing in, only to find that the elephant had already become an inmate. Then all the other animals came in one by one and finally started fighting for a place inside the hut. While the animals were thus busy fighting, the man set the hut on fire as planned and burnt it to the ground along with the animals. Though the animals fooled the man many times considering his tolerance as a weakness, the man outsmarted them eventually. Thus, this story undoubtedly proves that “you can fool people for a time, but not forever”.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Vocabulary

Word Classes

Question 1.
Fill in the blanks in the table below with the appropriate form of the word.

Verb Noun Adjective Adverb
Understand Understandably
Accommodation
Effective
Clearness Clearly
Fool Foolish
Considerable
Protect Protectively

Answer:

Verb Noun Adjective Adverb
Understand Understanding Understanding/Understandable Understandably
Accommodate Accommodation Accommodating Accommodatingly
Effect Effect/Effects Effective Effectively
Clear Clearness/Clearance/Clearing Clear Clear/Clearly
Fool Fool/Foolishness Foolish Foolishly
Consider Consideration Considerable Considerably
Protect Protection Protective Protectively

Fill in the blanks using the noun form of the verbs given in brackets.

Question 1.
The faces of the animals were capable of no other _____ (express) except a perpetual smile after the verdict.
Answer:
expression

Question 2.
The old woman stopped singing when there was a slight _____ (disturb).
Answer:
disturbance

KSEEB Solutions

Question 3.
Students learnt the correct ______ (pronounce) of the words.
Answer:
pronunciation

Question 4.
The lion was too hasty in his _____ (judge).
Answer:
judgement

Question 5.
Mara stood in _____ (amaze) looking at the lake.
Answer:
amazement.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle by Jomo Kenyatta A Note on the Author:

Jomo Kenyatta (1891-1978), was an African political leader, first president of independent Kenya (1964-78). A Kikuyu, he was one of the earliest and best-known African nationalist leaders. As secretary of his tribal association (1928), he campaigned for land reform and African political rights. Kenyatta included this story in his book ‘Facing Mount Kenya’ (1938) as an illustration of the relations between the Kikuyu people and Europeans.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English

The story ‘The Gentlemen of the Jungle’ by Jomo Kenyatta is a fable that satirises the colonisation of Africa by the European powers which claim to be reforming the natives, while in reality, they confine them because of their greed for expansion. The story can be described as an allegory because the writer uses animal figures to throw light on similar human situations. The word ‘gentlemen’ is ironically used to point out that the usurpers are far from being gentlemanly.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English 1

The story begins with the selfless act of a man who allows his friend – an elephant – to put his trunk inside his hut when there is heavy rain. But, the elephant, instead of remaining grateful, encroaches upon the hut of the man and throws him out. When the wronged man starts arguing with the elephant, the confusion attracts many animals from the nearby jungle, including The Lion King who is displeased that the peace of his jungle is disturbed by the misunderstanding between the man and the elephant. The elephant, one of the ministers of the king, pacifies the Lion King by assuring him that there is no threat to peace, but that he was having a discussion with his friend. The Lion King pleased that the man is a friend of the animals, assures him that his hut is not lost to him and that he would get it back depending upon the findings of a Commission that would be appointed to look into the matter.

The man, who is initially happy at the fairness of the king, is soon in for a shock as all members on the Commission are animals and there is absolutely no representation from his side. But, his protest is silenced with the explanation that his kind is not educated enough to understand the intricacy of the jungle law. He is also told that these representatives have been specially chosen by God to carry out the work. The man is assured that these members of repute would be impartial in their judgement.

KSEEB Solutions

But, as the man had feared, the elephant succeeds at winning the case by deposing before the court the false idea that the man had asked the elephant to protect his hut from the hurricane at the time of the torrential rain. The elephant boastfully says that since the hurricane had gained access to the hut because of the empty space available, he had occupied the empty space and put it to more economic use. Since the man had to admit that the undeveloped place hadn’t been occupied by anyone else before the elephant had occupied it, the elephant’s act is considered an act of kindness and the man is ordered to build another hut at another place.

The wronged man has no alternative but to build a new hut because he is afraid that the powerful animals on the Commission would be cruel to him. However, the tale of woe of the man doesn’t end with the elephant. The next hut he built is taken by Mr. Rhinoceros, another animal on the Commission, and the same verdict awaits the man. His lot is no better even after that because all the huts he builds are usurped by other members on the Commission: Mr Buffalo, Mr. Leopard and Mr. Hyena.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English 2

Finally, the poor man thinks of a plan. He builds a hut which is big enough to accommodate all the animals. As he had expected, all animals, including Mr. Lion, come to the hut and soon there ensues a fight among all. Making use of the opportunity, the man sets his hut on fire and along with the hut, all animals gathered in it are also dead. Thus, the man gets justice by taking law into his own hands.

Although traditionally the act of the man seems to be clever, but immoral, we cannot be harsh upon him in our judgement. He acts as he does simply because he has no other way to get justice.

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in Kannada

The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English 3
The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English 4
The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English 5
The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English 6
The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English 7
The Gentlemen of the Jungle Summary in English 8
Glossary:

  • hailstorm (n): thunderstorm in which pellets of ice fall
  • turmoil (n): disturbance, emotional agitation
  • tranquillity (n): peacefulness
  • intricacy (n): complexity
  • evidence (n): that which serves to prove
  • to gain access: find out a way to approach
  • compromise (v): to settle issues by mutual consensus
  • embroil (n): conflict

Leave a Comment

error: Content is protected !!