William Wordsworth's poem "Composed upon Westminster Bridge, September 3, 1802" is a celebration of the beauty and majesty of the city of London as seen from the vantage point of Westminster Bridge. The poem is written in sonnet form and is characterized by its vivid imagery and emotive language.
In the first quatrain, Wordsworth describes the city as being "sleepy" and "calm" at the early hour of dawn. The speaker marvels at the "every cry of every man" being hushed and the "sound of the city" being "far and near." The silence is broken only by the "gentle beat" of the river Thames, which flows beneath the bridge.
In the second quatrain, the speaker compares the city to a "majestic image" and a "dream of things that are not." The morning sun casts a golden light over the buildings and streets, creating a sense of wonder and awe in the speaker. The city is described as being "beautiful and bright," a "joy forever."
In the third quatrain, the speaker reflects on the impact of the city on the human soul. The city's beauty and grandeur have a "calming influence" on the mind and heart, bringing "peace and health" to those who live within its bounds. The city is a place of "harmony and love," where people from all walks of life come together in a shared sense of community.
In the final couplet, the speaker concludes the poem with a sense of reverence and admiration for the city. The city is a "miracle of unceasing labor," a testament to the human spirit and the never-ending quest for progress and improvement. It is a place of "eternal beauty," a symbol of hope and inspiration for all who behold it.
Overall, Wordsworth's poem "Composed upon Westminster Bridge, September 3, 1802" is a tribute to the enduring beauty and majesty of the city of London. Through its vivid imagery and emotive language, the poem captures the essence of the city and its impact on the human spirit.
What are 3 effects of the partitioning of India?
The apartheid between the Hindus and the Muslims: During the British regime in India, the Muslims comprised of approximately 25% of the total population of the country. Gradually the communal violence spread and left its mark in Noakhali in Bengal, Bihar, Rawalpindi and Garhmukteshwar in the United Provinces. The main spokesman for the partition was Muhammad Ali Jinnah. In congruence with such intense racial feelings, Muslim League Leader Mohammed Ali Jinnah, an exceptionally bright and competent lawyer, had embarked upon a campaign advocating a completely separate Muslim State. Aside from the loss of life and property, the partition damaged the heterogonous culture of the Indian subcontinent. Suhrawardy had been the initiator, the event not only led to various other acts of religious violence in the country but signified a point of no return to Hindu-Muslim relations. The areas with Hindu and Sikh majority were assigned to new India while the Muslim-majority areas were assigned for the new state of Pakistan.
A History of India’s Partition and Its Modern Effects
At midnight of 14—15 August 1947, India and Pakistan emerged legally as two self-governing countries. In order to determine the turning point on the path that led to such a partition, this essay finds it necessary to explore the factors which deteriorated Hindu-Muslim relations, making the separation necessary. According to the Indian Independence Act, however, inhabitants of the princely state of Kashmir were given the power to determine which country to join. But Lord Curzon argued that the separation of the state was mandatory as it would make it easier for the government to administrate the state more efficiently. Many cities, including Lahore, remained uncertain of their fate. An example was the partition of Bengal, done to prevent the Muslims of Bengal from joining the cause of nationalism. On 9 December 1946, the Muslim League which had earlier accepted the proposals of the Cabinet Mission, now withdrew its support on the ground that there was no guarantee for proper safeguards of the rights of the Muslim minority in the Assembly.
How the Partition of India happened
Is it true that India was never a unified country? The partition of India was the most significant event in the history of India. However only partial transfer of power was provided to the ministers responsible to the provinces and control over money in such areas were still in the hands of the British officialdom. Jinnah, for example, was not pleased with share of land allocated to Pakistan; he was also disturbed by the partition of Bengal and Punjab, terming it as a ticking time bomb, so to speak. Massacres, mass abductions of women, rape and arson were carried out by both Muslims and Hindus. The Indian leaders were increasingly pressing for constitutional reforms in India since the late 19th century. The funatic leaders played a prominent role in stoking the fires of rabid communalism.
