NCERT Solutions Class 11 English Chapter 26 : For Elkana

The capitalisation of the words represents their duty and authority as a parent. It was the thought that both parents were thinking when their little son interrupted during an ongoing discussion. Even if unspoken, the look both of them gave each other made it clear that they thought about the same thing. When the parents think about how disciplined their child must be, the capitalisation of the words shows the stress laid on it. Even if the parents do not say it, they are authoritative, and society expects the child to be well-behaved and obedient.

In the poem ‘For Elkana’, the poet has depicted a scene from a common Indian home. On one April evening, walking on the porch, the wife explains a few issues which the husband is unconcerned about, as he thinks that any man in his neighbourhood would have an answer to them. The lady is keen to discuss the issues with no disturbance and asks for the attention of her husband. It is a typical way in which a conversation occurs between a husband and a wife, let it be on any topic under the sun. The husband thinks the talk is not relevant and ignores it. He thinks that the issues which his wife is discussing are too simple to spend his time on and, in a funny way, declares that his wife is correct in order to avoid any further arguments. It might be interesting for the reader to find that during an argument, the poet doesn’t forget to explain the wife’s love for her husband.

An aside often creates a realistic effect in the mind of the reader while reading the poem. The use of understatement captivates the readers through the ironic humour it evokes.

The use of understatement in the poem “For Elkana” enhances the overall tone and adds humour to the depiction of the interactions between the husband, wife, and son. The husband’s thoughts and feelings are expressed through his actions and reactions rather than through overt declarations, such as when he “turns towards the more attractive view that opens up behind [his] eyes and shuts [his wife] out.” This subtlety allows the reader to infer the husband’s feelings without him stating them outright. Similarly, the son’s demanding nature is conveyed through his repeated demands for dinner rather than through explicit statements about his hunger or his desire for immediate satisfaction. The use of understatement also adds to the humour of the situation, as the husband and wife’s unspoken agreement about the importance of discipline is conveyed through their reactions to the son’s demands. Overall, the use of understatement in “For Elkana” adds depth and nuance to the portrayal of relationships and adds a comedic touch to the portrayal of events.

In the poem, the idyllic is represented by the warm April evening and the relaxing atmosphere as the speaker and his wife sit outside on their lawn. The pedestrian aspect is introduced with the mention of the broken window-pane and the practical tasks that need to be done around the house. The arrival of the young son interrupts this idyllic moment with his practical need for dinner and the disagreement between the wife and son over when he should eat. Despite the interruption, the moment is ultimately resolved with laughter and the three of them coming together to go into the house. The idyllic and pedestrian aspects coexist as the peaceful evening is briefly disrupted by everyday concerns.

The statement explains the subtle relationship between a wife and a husband. It depicts both sides of a relationship. When both are in a heated argument, both of them think the same and read the thoughts of each other. Apart from being a wife and a husband, they are parents to a seven-year-old boy. They possess the same feelings towards their child who they want to be disciplined. When the son demands dinner from his mother, she points a finger and asks him to stay quiet as there is an ongoing discussion that he is interrupting. The child, who was impatient, continued to nag. The parents looked at each other as they agreed that the discussion was interrupted, even if the father was least interested. Later, he agreed that the little boy should be given dinner immediately as per his logic and wits. During this situation, both of them think of the same thing, it is parenthood which binds them together other than their own relationship. They looked at each other to understand what the other person was thinking and realised that it was the same.

The seven-year-old child is impatient and young. When he listens to the discussion between the father and mother, his mother’s voice reminds him of his hunger. He goes to her and demands food. Though the mother asked him to wait for five minutes as there was an ongoing discussion, he demanded food by throwing his logic that he would not be hungry after this. The father finds the argument appealing and feels that the little boy, who is “such a logician deserves his dinner straight away”. The demand of the boy with such urgency and wittiness makes his mother laugh. The three of them were held together by this joy. The mother agrees to serve dinner, and the three of them enter the house.