Claude Lévi-Strauss

Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908–2009) was a French anthropologist who transformed the study of culture and influenced literary criticism. Drawing on Ferdinand de Saussure’s structural linguistics, Lévi-Strauss argued that human thought, culture, and stories are shaped not by individual creativity alone but by deep, unconscious structures of the mind. By applying structuralist methods to myths, rituals, and cultural practices, he showed that meaning is generated through patterns and relationships, rather than through isolated elements. His work offered a new way of understanding how literature and culture create meaning, and it remains central to structuralist approaches in literary criticism.

Structural Anthropology

Lévi-Strauss is regarded as the founder of structural anthropology. He argued that human cultures, like languages, are not random collections of customs but structured systems shaped by deep, unconscious rules. Instead of studying myths, rituals, or kinship systems in isolation, he examined the underlying patterns that connect them across societies. For example, family structures may vary in detail, but they all follow patterns of reciprocity, exchange, and prohibition. In this way, cultural practices can be “read” like a language, revealing the universal structures of human thought.

Bricolage

Lévi-Strauss introduced the concept of bricolage, meaning the creative recombination of existing cultural materials into new forms. Cultures, he argued, do not invent ideas out of nothing; instead, they borrow, rearrange, and reshape what is already available. This ongoing process produces cultural change and innovation. In literature, this means that myths, stories, and symbols are always built from cultural elements that exist in memory and tradition, remixed into new narratives.

Binary Oppositions

One of Lévi-Strauss’s most influential ideas is that myths and cultural systems are organised through binary oppositions. This idea extends Saussure’s insight that language gains meaning from differences between signs. For example, the word hut is meaningful only because it contrasts with house, shed, or mansion. Lévi-Strauss applied this to culture, showing that human thought also relies on opposites such as life/death, nature/culture, or raw/cooked.

These oppositions are not superficial. They express the hidden structures of the human mind. Myths and cultural practices work to mediate these tensions, attempting to reconcile contradictions that cannot be fully resolved. In this way, myths function like cultural “tools” that help societies manage fundamental conflicts in human experience.

Myths as Structures

Lévi-Strauss argued that myths are not random stories or flawed reflections of reality. Instead, they are structured systems that reveal how the human mind organises meaning. Myths gain their significance not from individual details but from the way their elements relate to each other.

Importantly, multiple versions of the same myth are not distortions but essential parts of its structure. Myths grow out of contradictions—for example, between belief and reality, or between freedom and necessity. They continuously generate new versions as cultures attempt to “reconcile the irreconcilable,” though complete resolution is never possible.

Myth and Language

To explain myth more clearly, Lévi-Strauss compared it to language. Building on Saussure’s distinction between langue (the structured, synchronic system of language) and parole (the individual, diachronic act of speech), Lévi-Strauss proposed that myth forms a third level of language.

Myth combines both synchronic (timeless) and diachronic (historical) dimensions. Yet, because these cannot be perfectly reconciled, myth remains dynamic and open-ended. In this sense, myths do not represent external reality but express the structures of human thought itself.

Contributions to Literary Criticism

Lévi-Strauss’s theories deeply shaped the field of literary criticism. By highlighting structures, binary oppositions, and systems of meaning, he encouraged critics to study literature as part of a wider cultural code rather than as isolated works of genius. His methods influenced later critics such as Roland Barthes, who extended structuralist approaches into the study of literature, media, and culture.

Through his work, literary studies adopted the view that meaning is generated by cultural and linguistic structures, not simply by individual authors or texts. This shift marked an important step toward structuralist and post-structuralist criticism.

Conclusion

Claude Lévi-Strauss demonstrated that myths, stories, and cultural practices are not random inventions but are shaped by hidden structures of the human mind. His concepts of bricolage, binary oppositions, and myth as a third level of language reshaped how we understand culture and literature. For literary criticism, his work opened new ways of analysing texts as systems of meaning within a larger cultural framework. Just as Saussure showed how language functions as a system of signs, Lévi-Strauss showed how myths and culture function as systems of structures. Together, their ideas form the foundation of structuralist thought and continue to influence literary theory today.

Ferdinand de Saussure

Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913), the Swiss linguist often regarded as the founder of modern structural linguistics, was one of the most influential figures in shaping twentieth century thought. His lectures were compiled and published posthumously as Course in General Linguistics (1916). This work provided the basis for the Structuralist school and introduced a scientific way of studying language. Saussure argued that language should not be treated merely as a historical sequence of changes. Instead, it should be understood as a structured system of signs functioning at a particular point in time. This shift in perspective laid the groundwork for semiotics, the science of signs. His ideas continue to influence fields ranging from anthropology to literary theory.

Langue and Parole

One of Saussure’s first distinctions was between langue and parole. Langue refers to the collective system of conventions, rules, and grammar that underlies a language. It is social, shared, and exists beyond the will of any individual. For example, the rule that adjectives usually come before nouns (“red car,” not “car red”). Parole, in contrast, is the individual use of that system, the concrete act of speaking or writing. For example, when someone says, “Good morning!” or writes, “I love reading novels,” that’s parole. Langue is the entire English language system, while a person saying “Good morning!” is an example of parole.

Saussure emphasised that language as a whole is not the private property of individual speakers. Rather, it is a social institution, a “storehouse” of rules and conventions that every member of a community unconsciously draws upon. This distinction also means that when we read an individual poem or novel, we are not merely encountering an isolated act of creativity but engaging with the larger social structure of language.

Semiotics: The Science of Signs

For Saussure, words are not symbols but signs. They are not simply labels attached to things. Instead, they work as signs within a system of meaning. A sign has two inseparable parts: the signifier and the signified.

The signifier is the form of the word, either spoken or written. For example, the sound we hear when someone says “tree” (/triː/) or the letters t-r-e-e on a page. The signified is the concept or mental image that comes to mind. When we hear or see “tree”, we do not focus on the letters themselves. We think of the idea of a tall plant with a trunk, branches, and leaves. The signifier and signified always go together. A sound without meaning is just noise. A concept without a word cannot be communicated. For Saussure, then, language is not a collection of labels for objects. It is a system of signs that connects forms (signifiers) with ideas (signifieds).

The Principle of Arbitrariness

The relationship between the signifier and signified is arbitrary. There is no natural or logical reason why a tree should be called a tree in English, arbre in French, or vriksham in Malayalam. The connection is based entirely on social agreement within a linguistic community. This arbitrariness explains why languages differ so widely and why language is flexible, diverse, and dependent on shared social codes.

Difference and Value

Saussure explained that signs do not get their meaning from direct links to real-world objects. Instead, meaning arises from differences between signs within the language system. The word hut carries its meaning only because it is different from words like house, shed, or mansion. A sign’s identity depends on what it is not, rather than on what it directly names.

This principle is clear in examples like the 8:25 Geneva–Paris train. Even if the locomotive, coaches, or staff change each day, we still recognise it as the same train because of its position in the schedule, its difference from the 7:25 or 9:25 trains. Similarly, the letter t can be written in many ways, yet it keeps its identity as long as it is distinct from letters like l, f, or i. What matters is not the substance of the sign but its relational value within the system.

Binary Oppositions

According to Saussure, language is structured through contrasts between signs. Meaning depends on these oppositions, such as day/night or good/bad. Even simple words like cat gain their identity because they are different from bat, cut, or cot. Binary oppositions form the backbone of how language organises meaning. They show that signs do not exist in isolation but always in relation to others.

Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic Relations

Saussure identified two axes of linguistic relations: syntagmatic and paradigmatic.

The syntagmatic axis is the horizontal combination of words in a sequence. For example, in the sentence ‘The cat plays with a ball,’ meaning builds as the words are combined in order. Adding more words, such as in the garden or before dinner, extends the chain and adds further meaning. The paradigmatic axis is the vertical selection of alternatives at each position in a sentence. For instance, replacing ball with mouse changes the meaning entirely. Similarly, calling someone a ‘terrorist’ versus a ‘freedom fighter’ alters the sentence’s political significance without changing its grammar. Together, these axes show how meaning is generated internally within the language system, rather than by referring to an external reality.

Language and Reality

Perhaps Saussure’s most profound contribution was his claim that language does not simply reflect reality, it constructs it. Signs exist only as differences within the system, and there are “no ideas or sounds that preexist the linguistic system.” Words create categories that shape how we perceive the world: colors are divided into named segments of a spectrum, and time is broken into days, months, and seasons.

Because meaning is relational and constructed, language has the power to reshape reality itself. A shift in words, such as substituting terrorist with freedom fighter, creates an entirely new understanding of the same event. Thus, language is not a passive tool but an active structure that organizes experience.

Influence and Legacy

Saussure’s theories reshaped not only linguistics but also anthropology, cultural studies, and literary criticism. Anthropologists like Claude Lévi-Strauss and Mary Douglas used structuralist principles to analyze cultural practices as systems of binary opposition. Roland Barthes extended Saussure’s semiotics to popular culture, interpreting advertisements, fashion, and even food as systems of signs. In literary studies, structuralist critics sought to bring rigor and objectivity by treating texts as systems of functions and structures. Vladimir Propp, for example, developed a structural model of folktales based on recurring narrative functions.

Saussure also opened the way for poststructuralist critiques. Thinkers like Jacques Derrida questioned whether structures had stable centers at all, pointing out that meaning could endlessly shift through processes of “deconstruction.”

Conclusion

Ferdinand de Saussure’s vision of language as a structured system of signs revolutionized modern thought. By distinguishing between langue and parole, defining the sign as a union of signifier and signified, emphasizing arbitrariness, and demonstrating that meaning arises through difference, he provided the foundation for semiotics. His insights revealed that language does not merely represent reality but actively constructs it, a realization that continues to shape the humanities and social sciences today.

I am Not that Woman: Summary and Analysis

                    Kishwar Naheed

                    Introduction to the Poem

                    Stanza-wise Summary

                    Critical Analysis

Kishwar Naheed

Kishwar Naheed (b. 1940) is a prominent feminist poet of Urdu literature,

originally born in India and later settled in Pakistan after Partition. She is known for her bold and rebellious voice against patriarchy, gender discrimination, and social injustices. Her poetry reflects the struggles of women living in conservative societies and challenges the oppressive structures that silence their individuality. Naheed’s work has often been controversial because she openly criticizes gender inequality; however, she remains one of the most influential voices in contemporary feminist writing in South Asia.

Introduction to the Poem

“I Am Not That Woman” is one of Kishwar Naheed’s most powerful poems, expressing a woman’s resistance against the patriarchal forces that try to define and confine her. The title itself is a declaration of defiance, rejecting the stereotypical image of women as submissive, dependent, and voiceless. Through vivid imagery, the poem portrays how women have been exploited: objectified as commodities, trapped within walls, crushed by customs and traditions, and treated as burdens due to the dowry system. Yet, despite these injustices, the poem emphasizes women’s resilience, individuality, and unyielding spirit. It calls for recognition of women’s voices and highlights that true freedom of a nation can only be achieved when women are liberated.

Stanza-wise Summary

Stanza 1

I am not that woman ……………………………..  smothered by stones.

The speaker opens by rejecting the stereotyped image of “that woman”- the woman reduced to a product, a billboard face, or a decorative item for men’s pleasure. The tone is defiant and declarative. The stanza insists that a woman’s worth is not confined to how she appears or how others want to present her. Beneath the surface of commercialized images and domestic expectations lies an individual with intelligence, inner life, and autonomy. The stanza establishes the poem’s voice: a refusal of objectification and a claim to subjectivity.

Stanza 2

I am the one you crushed …………………………………. smother my fragrance.

Here the poet uses the image of walls of stone as a metaphor for social rules, customs, and physical confinement that restrict women’s movement and freedoms. Men’s comparative freedom is highlighted,  they move like the breeze while women are expected to remain enclosed. Yet the stanza stresses that physical or social walls cannot destroy the speaker’s thoughts, speech, or being. The idea of confinement is not only physical but cultural: expectations, laws, and patriarchal practices all attempt to “wall in” women, but the speaker claims spiritual and intellectual escape from those limits

Stanza 3

I am the woman …………………………. When I am drowning.

This stanza develops two layers of imagery: light vs darkness, and flowers vs thorns/embers. Light stands for the woman’s inner life, hope, creativity, and truth; darkness stands for suppression and oblivion. The flower metaphor stresses that men take a woman’s best (her kindness, beauty, contributions) and return harm, thorns and embers that wound and burn. Despite this betrayal and damage, the speaker insists that essential qualities like scent (symbolizing identity, memory, influence) survive attempts to chain or ruin her. The stanza celebrates inner resilience: outward crushing cannot extinguish essential being.

Stanza 4

I am the one you married off ………………………… Cannot be free.

This stanza brings in concrete social practices, especially the dowry system, to show how economic and cultural structures treat women as burdens or commodities. Parents judge a daughter in monetary or utilitarian terms; marriage becomes a transaction that relieves them of “burden.” The stanza points to the moral injustice: even a woman’s virtues (chastity, motherhood, loyalty) do not secure respect or reciprocation. The picture is social and familial: customs produce deep material and emotional harm and reduce human relations to exchange.

Stanza 5

I am the commodity …………………………. I am not that woman!

The poem ends on an assertive, hopeful note. The speaker refuses permanent containment and promises to bloom fully to realize herself beyond imposed limits. The final image ties private liberation to public/political freedom: the freedom of women is a necessary condition for the freedom of the nation. The stanza transforms the personal declaration into a collective demand — women’s emancipation is justice and a step toward national progress.

Critical Analysis

The poem I Am Not That Woman by Kishwar Naheed is a bold feminist statement that dismantles the stereotypes imposed on women in patriarchal societies. Written in simple yet forceful language, the poem adopts the voice of a woman who speaks not just for herself but for all women subjected to exploitation and suppression. The repeated declaration of resistance establishes the poem as a manifesto against objectification, silencing, and inequality. Through this direct tone, the poet claims authority over her own identity and refuses to be defined by others.

One of the most striking aspects of the poem is its imagery. Naheed uses powerful contrasts to highlight the injustices faced by women. The “walls of stone” represent the suffocating restrictions imposed by traditions, while the breeze symbolises the unrestricted mobility men enjoy. Similarly, light and darkness become metaphors for women’s spirit and men’s attempts to conceal it. The imagery of flowers turning into thorns and embers illustrates how women’s sacrifices and love are often exploited, leaving them with pain and betrayal. Yet the poet reminds us that fragrance, like a woman’s essence, survives beyond destruction, symbolising resilience and endurance.

The poem also critiques oppressive social structures, particularly the dowry system. By exposing how parents treat daughters as burdens to be married off, Naheed reveals the deep-rooted economic and cultural mechanisms that devalue women. Even the most sacred aspects of womanhood, like chastity, loyalty, and motherhood, are disregarded. It shows how a woman’s worth is consistently denied recognition. This makes the poem not only a personal declaration but also a social critique that attacks entrenched customs.

Despite its sharp portrayal of suffering, the poem is ultimately a proclamation of hope and empowerment. The speaker rejects permanent confinement and insists on her right to flourish freely. The final claim that no nation can be free without the liberation of its women elevates the poem from an individual protest to a political statement. By linking women’s emancipation to the country's overall progress, Naheed situates feminism within a broader struggle for justice and national liberation.

The strength of the poem lies in its clarity and directness. Without relying on ornamentation or complex structures, Naheed delivers her message with rhetorical power. The voice is universal, echoing the frustrations of countless women across cultures while retaining its roots in South Asian realities. At the same time, the repetition of defiance gives the poem a chant-like quality, making it memorable and impactful. In this way, I Am Not That Woman becomes both poetry and protest, an aesthetic expression and a political weapon.

Kishwar Naheed’s poem is a powerful rejection of patriarchal oppression and a call for women’s agency. It exposes objectification, critiques social customs, and affirms resilience, all while demanding recognition of women as equal beings. Its message is both personal and collective, reminding readers that the struggle for women’s freedom is inseparable from the struggle for human dignity and national liberation.

 

Structuralism

What is Structuralism?

Structuralism is a philosophical approach that originated in France in the 1950s. It was not limited to literature; it shaped fields like anthropology, linguistics, psychology, and philosophy. At its heart lies a simple but powerful insight: nothing can be understood in isolation. Nothing has meaning by itself. Every object, word, or custom gains meaning only through its relation to a larger system.

Think of language. A word like tree does not have meaning on its own. Its meaning comes from the way English, as a language, organises words and from the differences between words such as tree, bush, and shrub. Structuralists argued that the same principle applies to culture, literature, and even myths: everything is part of a structure, and meaning arises from that structure.

It is important to note that these structures are not physical objects. They are mental frameworks such as patterns, codes, and rules that humans create in order to organise and make sense of the world. Meaning, therefore, is not hidden inside things; it is produced through relationships within a system.

The Foundations of Structuralism

Structuralism grew out of the work of the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure. His ideas on language deeply influenced modern thought. Structuralists argued that meaning does not come from single words or objects. It comes from their place within a larger system of relations and differences. For example, the word tree is meaningful only because it is not bush or shrub.

This approach soon spread beyond linguistics. The anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss applied it to myths and kinship systems. He showed that even cultural practices are shaped by hidden structures. Myths from different societies, for instance, are often built on binary oppositions—life and death, nature and culture, male and female.

In this way, structuralism became a method of study. It asked us to look not only at individual things, but also at the systems and patterns that give them meaning.

Structuralism in Literary Theory and Criticism

When structuralism entered literary studies in the 1960s, it changed the way critics thought about texts. Earlier approaches, such as New Criticism, had focused on the text itself, treating it as a self-contained object to be closely read. Structuralism challenged this by arguing that a text cannot be fully understood on its own. It is always influenced by the rules, patterns, and traditions of literature.

A structuralist critic does not ask, “What did the author intend?” but rather, “What system of rules makes this text possible?” In this view, the author is not the sole creator of meaning, but a participant in a larger system of literary language. Likewise, the reader is not just a person with feelings, but someone who understands the text through shared rules and conventions.

Core Ideas in Structuralist Criticism

Structuralist critics focus on structures, rules, and systems. Literature is seen as a network of signs, not as an expression of personal emotions or reflections of reality. Just as language has grammar, literature has conventions of narrative, genre, and symbolism. For example, a “hero” is meaningful only because there exists a “villain” or some opposing force. A “beginning” in a story is significant because it sets up the possibility of an “ending.” Meaning comes from these relationships. This shift meant that critics began to analyse texts through patterns and oppositions rather than through authorial intention or reader response.

Methods and Approaches

Structuralist critics often look at the patterns behind a text rather than just the text itself.

·       Genres and Conventions: Every piece of writing belongs to a type or tradition. For example, John Donne’s poem The Good Morrow is linked to the alba or “dawn song,” where lovers feel sad when the morning separates them. Knowing this helps us see that the poem’s meaning is not only from Donne’s words but also from how it plays with that tradition.

·       Binary Oppositions: Structuralists say that stories often use opposites to create meaning—like love versus hate, life versus death, or city versus village. For instance, in many fairy tales, the contrast between good and evil is what drives the story. Without these opposites, the meaning would not be as clear.

·       Narrative Structures: Stories also follow common patterns. Roland Barthes explained that stories are full of “codes,” such as puzzles that make us curious (Who is the murderer? What will happen next?) or actions that keep the story moving. Tzvetan Todorov added that most stories go through three stages: a calm beginning (equilibrium), a problem or disruption, and finally, a return to balance. For example, in Cinderella, life is peaceful, then trouble comes with the stepmother, and in the end, balance is restored when she marries the prince.

The Impact of Structuralism

When structuralism reached Britain and the USA in the 1970s, it created a storm. It challenged established approaches like New Criticism, which had valued the close reading of single texts. Structuralism opened up broader questions: What makes something literary? How do narratives function? What rules and systems lie beneath cultural practices?

By shifting attention from individual works to the wider structures of meaning, structuralism transformed literary studies. It paved the way for later theories such as poststructuralism, deconstruction, and semiotics, which further interrogated how meaning is produced and interpreted.

Major Theorists of Structuralism

• Ferdinand de Saussure - Known as the father of structural linguistics. He showed that language works as a system of signs (signifier + signified).
• Claude Lévi-Strauss - Used structuralist methods in anthropology. He studied myths, kinship, and cultural practices, showing how they are built on hidden patterns like binary oppositions (nature/culture, life/death).
• Roland Barthes - Brought structuralism into literary and cultural studies. He analysed how myths, advertisements, and literature all follow systems of meaning.
• Tzvetan Todorov - Focused on narrative theory. He explained how most stories follow a pattern: balance → disruption → return to balance.
• Gérard Genette - Developed narratology. He studied narrative structures in detail, especially time (order, duration, frequency), perspective (who tells the story), and narrative levels.

My English by Aleena Akashamittayi

Aleena, a poet from the Pathanamthitta district of Kerala, is known for her bold and thought-provoking writing. Though also a model and singer, her primary passion lies in poetry. She writes poems and short stories in Malayalam and occasionally pens articles on topics like caste, gender, sexuality, and religion. Aleena is a Dalit feminist writer whose work blends the personal with the political, often exploring themes of identity and social justice. Her first poetry collection, Silk Route, was published by Gooseberry Publications in 2021 and gained attention for its powerful voice and experimental use of language.

Aleena’s poem “My English” showcases her distinctive poetic voice by blending strong imagery, personal emotion, and influences from both Malayalam and English. Written in a conversational tone, the poem delves into the struggles of using a language inherited through colonial rule. It is not merely about grammar: it is about survival, hunger, and the politics of language.

Speaking from the margins, Aleena highlights how language shapes identity, especially for people from historically oppressed communities. Her poem powerfully reflects the tension between cultural pride and linguistic alienation, offering a sharp and honest commentary on power, identity, and belonging.

“My English” is not just about language; it is about history, identity, class, caste, religion, pain, and pride. Every grammar mistake in the poem reflects a real-life injustice, and every broken sentence tells a story of survival. Aleena’s English may not be perfect, but it is powerful, honest, and deeply hers.

🟩 Stanza 1

My English is simple ............. punishable by death.

The poet begins by saying that her English is simple, not sophisticated. It is plain and basic because it is scared. This fear comes from the pressure of making mistakes.

The phrase "punishable by death" is not literal- it means the fear of being laughed at, insulted, or looked down upon for not speaking English properly. The poet’s English carries anxiety and shame, not because she lacks intelligence, but because of how society judges people based on their language skills.

🟩 Stanza 2

My English is first generation ......... it would never smell.

The poet tells us her English is "first generation" - she is the first in her family to speak it. Her parents were poor labourers who cooked for others but never ate that food themselves and worked on land they didn’t own. They grew flowers that they never got to enjoy.

These lines show how her family lived in poverty and served others without receiving any benefit. Her English, therefore, comes from a background of hard work, sacrifice, and denial, not from education or wealth.

🟩 Stanza 3

Its grandparents  ........ slaves.

Her English has a deeper past. Her grandparents converted to Christianity, likely due to colonial influence or missionary pressure. Their parents, even earlier, were slaves, possibly under caste-based or colonial systems.

These two lines explain that her English carries a history of forced change, oppression, and lack of freedom. It is not inherited from a proud tradition but from survival and struggle.

🟩 Stanza 4

My English has no roots  ............ was talking about.

Her English has no connection to British royalty (“the late queen”). Instead, it came through missionaries, who preached religion not with love, but with control. They spoke about heaven, hell, justice, and equality, but often used these ideas to rule over others, not to free them.

The phrase “pseudo arm” means it was a fake act of kindness, something that looked helpful but was controlling. Even the words of Jesus became tools to burden her people instead of liberating them. Her English comes from this kind of twisted preaching, not noble literature.

🟩 Stanza 5

My English is a slave owner’s illegitimate child.

This short line is extremely powerful. It compares her English to a child born to a slave owner and a slave, not out of love, but through violence, force, and domination. It means her English was created in a relationship of power imbalance. It is not accepted fully by either side. It stands as a symbol of oppression, exploitation, and identity confusion.

🟩 Stanza 6

My English has issues .......... always against it.

Here, the poet plays with grammar rules to show her reality. “Subject-verb agreement” is a common grammar rule, but she gives it a deeper meaning. Her English was always a “subject”- a person under rule, never free. It never experienced any fair “agreement” or justice in life. The “verbs” which are actions were always harmful or oppressive to her. So, even her grammar mistakes reflect her real-life struggles. Grammar becomes a metaphor for injustice.

🟩 Stanza 7

My English never gets ......... in past.

This stanza continues using grammar as a metaphor. Her English doesn’t handle tenses (past, present, future) well. But again, the real meaning is emotional. Her English is worried about the future (tensed) and trapped in painful memories of the past. This shows that emotional trauma and fear affect her language. She finds it hard to speak freely because of everything her background carries.

🟩 Stanza 8

My English swallows ............. experimental poetry.

She says her English leaves out articles (“a,” “an,” “the”) because it is always hungry. Hunger here means poverty, lack of resources, or even the need for dignity. What little it does speak, are just “crumbs”- broken bits of speech. But people don’t understand the reason. They call it “freak” or “experimental” poetry, thinking it is strange. They do not realize her English sounds different because it was born out of need, not style.

🟩 Stanza 9

My English gets quota .......... for being outdated.

The poet points out that her English is included in official spaces like national seminars, possibly through reservation or diversity programs. But at the same time, it is considered old-fashioned or not good enough. This means society pretends to include her but still doesn’t truly value or respect her English. It is treated as something second-rate.

🟩 Stanza 10

My English has no Shakespeares............. dies in the cradles.

She compares her English to the world of famous literature. Her English has no great writers like Shakespeare. The Sylvia Plaths (poets full of emotion) in her world are committing suicide, meaning they don’t survive their pain. Her Mary Shelleys don’t just write horror, they live it. Her John Keatses die too young - their talent never gets a chance to grow. These lines show that people like her have potential, but social suffering kills creativity early.

🟩 Stanza 11  

My English is a token and ........... is just tired.

She says her English is often treated as a “token” - something shown off for diversity and as “slang” - not seen as proper. But she proudly says, it is hers. She owns it. Her English is like a war veteran: it has fought through generations of pain, struggle, and discrimination. Now, like a tired soldier, it just wants rest. These final lines give a strong emotional ending, showing that her English may be broken, but it is real, tested, and deeply personal.

 

Critical Analysis

Aleena’s poem “My English” is a poignant exploration of language as both a tool and a barrier. The poem challenges the conventional idea that mastery of English is synonymous with intelligence or social worth. Instead, Aleena presents English as a language burdened by history- specifically colonialism-and as a marker of identity for marginalized communities.

The poet uses strong imagery and a conversational tone to convey the emotional and cultural struggle of expressing oneself in a language that is not fully “owned” but imposed. This tension highlights the complex relationship between language and power. For Aleena, English is a language of survival rather than perfection. The “mistakes” in grammar and broken sentences are deliberate, emphasizing authenticity and resistance rather than shame.

A significant strength of the poem is its ability to connect personal experience with larger social issues such as class, caste, and religion. Aleena’s English reflects her lived reality - one shaped by systemic inequalities and historical oppression. This makes the poem a powerful commentary on how language can both exclude and empower.

Moreover, Aleena’s work challenges readers to rethink their assumptions about language and identity. The poem questions who gets to define “correct” English and reveals how such standards often marginalize voices from the periphery.

 “My English” is not just a poem about language, it is a bold assertion of identity and dignity. Through her unique voice, Aleena transforms English from a symbol of colonial dominance into a medium of personal and political expression.

Read more about the poem My English 

A Tale of Two Cities - Summary

A Tale of Two Cities

Chapter-wise Summary  

 

Book 1:

Recalled to Life

 

Chapter 1: The Period

In 1775, England and France face social turmoil and contrasting extremes. The opening line famously describes it as "the best of times, the worst of times." England is intrigued by spiritualism, while its American colonies are rebelling. Meanwhile, France is suffering under an unjust monarchy, with economic and social crises affecting its citizens. Both nations are led by monarchs—England's king and plain queen, and France's king with a fair queen—who are largely detached from their people’s suffering.

In England, crime is rampant, and travelers on the roads fear robbery; people are advised to lock away their possessions when they leave home. Harsh punishments, including executions, are used in both countries to suppress unrest. In France, a young man is brutally punished for failing to kneel to monks: his hands are cut off, his tongue removed, and he is burned alive. All the while, trees destined to become guillotines are growing, and carts that will one day carry the condemned to their deaths rattle through the French countryside.

 

Chapter 2: The Mail

On a misty night, a mail coach makes its way from London to Dover. The passengers are tense, each suspicious that the others might be thieves. A horseman approaches in the dark, alarming the coachman and guard, who fear a robbery. The horseman turns out to be Jerry Cruncher, a messenger from Tellson’s Bank in London, who is looking for one of the passengers, Mr. Jarvis Lorry. He hands Mr. Lorry a note that reads: “Wait at Dover for Mam’selle.” Lorry sends Jerry back with the cryptic response: “Recalled to Life,” a message that leaves Jerry thoroughly puzzled.

 

Chapter 3: The Night Shadows

Jerry rides back to London, trying to make sense of the strange message, “Recalled to Life.” Meanwhile, Mr. Lorry dozes in the coach and is haunted by dreams of a man who has been "buried alive" for 18 years. In his dream, Lorry speaks to the ghostly figure, asking if he wants to be “recalled to life,” but the answer he hears is a weary and uncertain, “I can’t say.” This man, Mr. Lorry believes, is someone he is about to rescue from a long imprisonment.

Chapter 4: The Preparation

Mr. Lorry arrives in Dover and checks into a hotel, awaiting the arrival of a young lady, Lucie Manette. He reflects on Tellson's Bank, an old English institution with offices in both London and Paris, where he has worked for many years. When Lucie arrives, Lorry gently explains the situation to her. She is shocked to learn that her father, Dr. Manette, is alive, as she had believed he died when she was a baby. Lorry tells her that her father was secretly imprisoned in France for nearly two decades and has only recently been found. Lucie, overwhelmed, vows to bring him back to health. Lorry arranges for a companion, a tough but compassionate woman named Miss Pross, to assist Lucie on the journey.

 

Chapter 5: The Wine-Shop

In Paris, a cask of red wine spills onto the street outside Monsieur and Madame Defarge’s wine shop. The impoverished townspeople eagerly drink from the puddles, staining their faces and hands. A man dips his finger in the wine and writes “blood” on a wall, foreshadowing the coming revolution. The people’s desperation and suffering are visible everywhere. Mr. Lorry and Lucie arrive at the Defarges’ shop, where they observe that the townspeople call each other “Jacques”—a code name used by revolutionaries. Monsieur Defarge leads them to the attic of a dilapidated building nearby. As they make their way up through narrow, filthy corridors, Lucie feels faint from the stench and fear of meeting her father for the first time.

 

Chapter 6: The Shoemaker

In the small, dim room, they find Dr. Manette, a frail old man with wild white hair and beard, hunched over a shoe he is making. He doesn’t even recognize his own name, instead identifying himself by his prison cell, "One Hundred and Five, North Tower." Dr. Manette has taken up shoemaking as a way to cope with the years of isolation and trauma he endured in prison. Monsieur Defarge, who once served Dr. Manette, introduces Mr. Lorry, but the doctor barely remembers him. When Lucie enters the room, Dr. Manette glimpses the golden hair that reminds him of his beloved wife. Though disoriented, he begins to recognize something in Lucie’s face and hair, which resemble his wife's, and his memories start to surface.

Lucie gently holds her father, promising to care for him, and persuades him to come with her to England to start anew. As they prepare to leave, Dr. Manette clutches his shoemaking tools—a sign of the mental burden he still carries. Mr. Lorry and Lucie, together with the fragile Dr. Manette, set off for London, hoping to bring him peace and healing.

 

Book 2

The Golden Thread

Chapter 1: Five Years Later

The year is 1780, and Jerry Cruncher works for Tellson's Bank in London, performing odd jobs. At home, he argues with his wife, accusing her of praying against him and ruining his business. Despite her protests that she’s only blessing him, Jerry is convinced her prayers harm him and scolds her even for saying grace over meals. After breakfast, he heads to work and is soon sent out on a job, leaving his son, Young Jerry, who notices his father's fingers are always stained with rust. This rust foreshadows Jerry’s mysterious nighttime activities.

 

Chapter 2: A Sight

Jerry is sent to the Old Bailey courthouse, where Charles Darnay is on trial for treason. The scene at the Old Bailey is grim, filled with crime, disease, and an eager crowd awaiting the spectacle of a brutal execution, should Darnay be found guilty. The courtroom reeks of fumigating herbs and vinegar, yet disease often claims even judges’ lives here. Jerry waits for Mr. Jarvis Lorry’s orders as the trial begins. Darnay faces the horrifying prospect of being drawn and quartered if convicted. Observing the crowd’s bloodlust, Darnay scans the room and notices Lucie Manette and her father, both of whom will testify against him.

 

Chapter 3: A Disappointment

The trial begins with John Barsad accusing Darnay of collecting and passing on military secrets to France, though Barsad claims he’s never done anything suspicious himself. His servant, Roger Cly, backs this story, insisting he found incriminating papers in Darnay’s desk. Lucie and her father, Dr. Manette, testify about their encounter with Darnay on a ferry, and though she tries to help Darnay by revealing his confidential business, Lucie feels guilty, fearing her testimony might condemn him. Mr. Stryver, Darnay's lawyer, aggressively questions Barsad’s motives, suggesting Barsad is a liar and a spy. Stryver points out that his colleague, Sydney Carton, looks nearly identical to Darnay, casting doubt on Barsad’s ability to identify Darnay accurately. The jury, swayed by Stryver’s argument, declares Darnay “Acquitted,” and Jerry Cruncher hurries to deliver the news to Tellson’s Bank.

 

Chapter 4: Congratulatory

After the trial, Lucie, Dr. Manette, and Mr. Lorry congratulate Darnay. Dr. Manette, though, has an uneasy reaction, sensing something familiar in Darnay. Sydney Carton joins them, though he’s disheveled and slightly drunk. Carton and Darnay dine together, during which Carton, bitter and self-loathing, admits his dissatisfaction with life. He resents Darnay, seeing him as a reminder of the success and happiness he feels he’s missed due to his own failures and dissolute lifestyle.

 

Chapter 5: The Jackal

Sydney Carton assists Stryver with legal cases, working tirelessly behind the scenes. Although Carton has great intelligence, he lacks the ambition to improve his life and is often in a state of depression. Stryver, who has a strong will and aims high, relies on Carton’s sharp mind but takes all the credit. In their conversation, Carton reveals he’s burdened by memories of his school days, during which he neglected his potential. They toast to Lucie, whom Carton secretly admires, but Carton’s thoughts quickly spiral into despair, realizing he may never achieve the life he desires.

 

Chapter 6: Hundreds of People

Four months after the trial, the Manettes have settled in Soho. Dr. Manette has restarted his medical practice, and Mr. Lorry is a frequent visitor. While waiting for the Manettes one afternoon, Lorry is disturbed by Dr. Manette’s old shoemaking tools, a painful reminder of his imprisonment. Miss Pross, Lucie’s loyal servant, worries about the many suitors who may disrupt Lucie’s life, though she believes her brother Solomon is the only man truly worthy of Lucie (despite his betrayal). During dinner, Darnay shares a story about a mysterious message found in the Tower of London by a prisoner, which unsettles Dr. Manette. Later, Lucie reflects on the sound of footsteps, suggesting they symbolize the many people destined to enter their lives, which foreshadows the coming turmoil of the French Revolution.

 

Chapter 7: Monseigneur in Town

In Paris, the powerful and arrogant Monseigneur holds a grand reception, revealing the disconnect between the French aristocracy and the suffering of the common people. After the party, the Marquis St. Evrémonde, a nobleman, travels through the streets at high speed, heedless of the danger to pedestrians. His carriage strikes and kills a child, and he dismisses the incident, tossing a coin to the grieving father, Gaspard, as compensation. When a coin is thrown back at him, the Marquis is enraged and calls the peasants "dogs." This event shows the cruelty and indifference of the aristocracy toward the poor, setting the stage for the coming revolution.

 

Chapter 8: Monseigneur in the Country

As the Marquis St. Evrémonde travels through the countryside to his chateau, he sees widespread poverty and suffering. The peasants live in terrible conditions, and they view the Marquis with fear and resentment. When the Marquis reaches a village, he stops to ask a road-mender about a man he saw clinging to the bottom of his carriage. The road-mender describes seeing the man, but they can’t figure out who he was or what he wanted.

The Marquis finally arrives at his chateau, feeling no sympathy for the suffering of the people. His only concern is his own comfort and power. That night, he waits for a visitor, who turns out to be his nephew, Charles Darnay. Darnay tells the Marquis that he despises the family’s cruel ways and wants to distance himself from their legacy. He renounces his inheritance and declares his desire to make his own way in the world. The Marquis is unmoved, viewing Darnay’s ideals as foolish. Later that night, while the Marquis sleeps, he is murdered in his bed by someone who leaves a note signed with the words “Drive him fast to his tomb. This, from Jacques.”

Chapter 9: The Gorgon’s Head

The next morning, the Marquis is found dead, stabbed through the heart. His body is discovered by his servants, and the countryside reacts with silent satisfaction, pleased that someone has avenged their suffering. Back in England, Charles Darnay, who has made a new life as a French teacher, proposes to Lucie Manette. He expresses his deep love for her and his wish to marry her. He also insists on confessing his true identity and family background to Dr. Manette. However, Dr. Manette asks him to keep it secret until the morning of the wedding. Darnay agrees out of respect.

 

Chapter 10: Two Promises

Lucie and her father have a heartfelt conversation in which Dr. Manette assures her that she should follow her heart and marry if it will make her happy. Dr. Manette is moved to tears, recalling the horrors of his past and his hopes for Lucie's future. Charles Darnay and Dr. Manette meet privately, and Darnay promises to be a good husband to Lucie. Dr. Manette seems troubled by Darnay’s true identity, yet he promises not to let it interfere with their marriage.

After Darnay leaves, Dr. Manette experiences a relapse, reverting to his shoemaking, a habit he developed during his years in prison. This lapse reveals how deeply scarred he is by his past trauma, but the next morning he returns to normal.

 

Chapter 11: A Companion Picture

Meanwhile, Sydney Carton visits Charles Darnay and shares a somewhat awkward, melancholy dinner with him. Carton reveals his own struggles with self-worth and admits his disappointment in life. Darnay attempts to be gracious, though he finds Carton's behavior off-putting and odd. Carton leaves Darnay's apartment feeling bitter and discontented, believing Darnay embodies everything he might have been if he had made better choices in life.

Carton’s encounter with Darnay fuels his own sense of failure and self-loathing. He returns to his lonely, dark apartment, reflecting on his wasted potential and regretting the choices that have led him to this point.

 

Chapter 12: The Fellow of No Delicacy

Mr. Stryver, a successful but somewhat arrogant lawyer, decides he wants to propose to Lucie Manette. Confident that he's the perfect match for her, he shares his intentions with his friend Mr. Jarvis Lorry at Tellson's Bank. However, Mr. Lorry, a practical and perceptive man, doubts that Lucie would accept Stryver’s proposal and subtly tries to dissuade him. Mr. Lorry even offers to discreetly gauge the Manettes' feelings about the match to prevent any embarrassment.

When Mr. Lorry returns and confirms that Lucie is unlikely to welcome Stryver's proposal, Stryver’s pride kicks in. Rather than feeling hurt, he convinces himself that he never really needed to marry Lucie and that the proposal was unimportant. This scene highlights Stryver’s arrogance and his ability to rationalize disappointment by pretending the idea was never that valuable to him in the first place.

 

Chapter 13: The Fellow of No Delicacy

Sydney Carton visits Lucie Manette and confesses his love for her, though he admits he does not expect her to feel the same way. Carton acknowledges his flaws and past mistakes, saying he has no hope of redemption. Lucie, deeply moved, listens with compassion. Carton swears that, despite his failures, he would do anything for her and those she loves. He tells Lucie that knowing her has stirred something good within him, but he sees no way to change his circumstances.

This encounter becomes a turning point for Carton, even though he believes his life is beyond repair. His love for Lucie sparks a desire to do something meaningful, even if he cannot change his life’s direction. Lucie is left feeling both sorrowful and touched by Carton’s vulnerability, recognizing a deeply wounded soul beneath his careless exterior.

 

Chapter 14: The Honest Tradesman

Jerry Cruncher and his son observe a chaotic funeral procession for Roger Cly, a spy despised by the crowd. The procession quickly devolves into a riot, with the mob destroying property and causing mayhem until soldiers arrive. Jerry stays behind at the cemetery, taking note of Cly’s grave. Later, under the cover of night, Jerry’s secret occupation as a “resurrection man” is revealed—he digs up graves to sell the bodies to surgeons for dissection. Young Jerry, who follows his father out of curiosity, is horrified when he sees his father and others exhuming a body. The next day, young Jerry asks if he could one day become a “resurrection man” like his father. Jerry, despite being abusive to his wife, is oddly pleased by his son’s interest in his shady line of work.

 

Chapter 15: Knitting

In Saint Antoine, Monsieur Defarge brings a visitor, the mender of roads, to the wine shop. The mender tells of the execution he witnessed: a man, who once sought justice for his murdered child, was publicly hanged as punishment for killing the cruel Marquis. This execution, and the placement of the gallows over the village’s drinking fountain, deeply angers the Jacques (the revolutionaries), who vow vengeance on the aristocracy. Madame Defarge adds the Marquis’s family to her encoded knitting, a record of those marked for death. Defarge later takes the mender of roads to witness the royal family’s procession, where he cheers enthusiastically to maintain the illusion of loyalty. Madame Defarge cryptically remarks that she’s knitting “shrouds,” symbolizing the death awaiting those in power as revolution brews.

 

Chapter 16: Still Knitting

The Defarges learn from a contact that a spy named John Barsad has been sent to observe their quarter. When Barsad visits the wine shop under the guise of a friendly chat, Madame Defarge quietly signals their visitors to leave by placing a rose in her headdress. Barsad attempts to extract information by casually bringing up Gaspard’s execution and discussing the oppressive state of the poor, but Madame Defarge keeps her responses vague and neutral. Barsad then mentions that Lucie Manette is to marry Charles Darnay, the new Marquis, hoping to provoke a reaction. Monsieur Defarge is visibly affected by this news, but Madame Defarge reassures him that both Barsad and Darnay are marked in her knitting, a symbolic death list, and that their fates are sealed.

 

Chapter 17: One Night

The evening before her wedding, Lucie speaks with her father, Dr. Manette, sharing her love for him and her sorrow at leaving him to start her new life with Darnay. Dr. Manette reveals his haunting memories from prison, recalling how he would look at the moon and wonder about the family he might never meet. Lucie’s devotion and assurances of her love bring him comfort and peace. That night, she enters her father’s room as he sleeps, silently praying for him and kissing him, symbolizing her deep connection and gratitude. This moment reinforces the bond between Lucie and her father, foreshadowing the challenges they will face together.

 

Chapter 18: Nine Days

The morning of the wedding brings joy but also hidden pain for Dr. Manette. Though he supports Lucie’s marriage, he is visibly distressed after the ceremony and isolates himself in his room. When Mr. Lorry returns later, he finds that Dr. Manette has relapsed into his old state, obsessively making shoes as he did during his imprisonment. Lorry and Miss Pross care for him in shifts, worried about his mental health but determined to keep Lucie unaware of his condition. For nine days, Dr. Manette remains lost in his shoemaking, showing no recognition of his surroundings, until he eventually recovers. His relapse reveals the psychological scars of his imprisonment and the weight of his past.

 

Chapter 19: An Opinion

On the tenth day, Dr. Manette returns to normal, though he seems unaware of how much time has passed. Mr. Lorry carefully asks the doctor, under the pretense of helping a “friend,” what might trigger such an episode. Dr. Manette acknowledges that trauma may cause one to revert to past coping mechanisms and explains that he truly cannot recall what happened during his relapse. Mr. Lorry suggests removing the tools associated with this behavior, for the sake of Lucie’s happiness. Though Dr. Manette is initially hesitant, he agrees, understanding that it might protect his peace of mind. Once Dr. Manette leaves to join Lucie and Darnay, Mr. Lorry and Miss Pross quietly destroy the shoemaking bench and tools, symbolically burying the painful memories of his imprisonment.

 

Chapter 20: A Plea

Sydney Carton has a heartfelt conversation with Charles Darnay. He admits to feeling directionless and regrets not living up to his potential. Carton asks Darnay to consider him a friend and allow him occasional visits to their family, although he promises not to intrude too often. Darnay agrees to this. Later, Darnay mentions this conversation to his wife, Lucie, describing Carton as a man given to carelessness. Lucie, however, sees the good in Carton and urges Darnay to treat him with kindness and respect, as Carton is “capable of good things.” Darnay agrees to honor Lucie’s request, showing her compassion towards Carton’s struggles.

Chapter 21: Echoing Footsteps

Years pass, and Lucie’s family grows with the birth of her daughter, little Lucie, though she also loses a son. Carton frequently visits, becoming particularly close to little Lucie. These moments of family life are described as full of love and warmth. However, a sense of foreboding lingers in the background, with echoes of footsteps hinting at ominous events to come.

At the same time in France, the storming of the Bastille marks the start of the French Revolution. The revolutionaries, led by Defarge and Madame Defarge, seize control of the prison. Defarge searches the North Tower, where Dr. Manette was once held, and finds the initials “A.M.” etched into the wall. The mob captures the prison governor, and Madame Defarge brutally kills him as a symbol of rebellion against the aristocracy. The revolution is underway, with the revolutionaries parading through Paris with the governor’s head on a pike.

 

Chapter 22: The Sea Still Rises

The revolution gains momentum, and the starving people of Saint Antoine become a powerful force. News spreads that an official named Foulon, who callously suggested the hungry should “eat grass,” has been captured. Defarge and the crowd hunt him down, force-feed him grass, and hang him. After a couple of failed attempts, they finally succeed, displaying his head on a pike with grass stuffed in his mouth as a form of dark justice. They also kill Foulon’s son-in-law, parading both men’s heads as symbols of revenge against oppression. Despite their ongoing struggles, the people find a grim sense of satisfaction and unity in their revolt.

 

Chapter 23: Fire Rises

The revolutionary spirit spreads beyond Paris. In the villages, peasants begin attacking the estates of the aristocrats. One night, a mysterious figure meets the mender of roads in the village where the Marquis once ruled, and they conspire to burn the Marquis’s chateau. As the chateau is engulfed in flames, villagers celebrate, ringing bells and refusing to help extinguish the fire. Gabelle, a tax collector and the current representative of the Marquis, narrowly escapes death by hiding on his roof. The chapter ends with an image of France ablaze, as peasants across the country rise up against their oppressors.

 

Chapter 24: Drawn to the Loadstone Rock

Three years later, the French Revolution is in full swing. Many aristocrats have fled France, some seeking refuge in England and coming to Tellson’s Bank to manage their affairs. Charles Darnay, who has renounced his family’s title, meets with Mr. Lorry at the bank, discussing the volatile situation in France. Mr. Lorry is preparing to travel to Tellson’s Paris branch despite the risks, and Darnay expresses concern for his friend’s safety. During this visit, Darnay notices a letter addressed to his true identity, the heir to the Evremonde estate.

The letter is from Gabelle, who has been imprisoned by revolutionaries and faces execution. He begs Darnay to save him, as he’s being punished solely for remaining loyal to the Evremonde family. Feeling a deep responsibility, Darnay decides to secretly return to France to rescue Gabelle. He realizes this is a dangerous mission but believes he has no choice, though he hides his intentions from Lucie and Dr. Manette. Before departing, Darnay leaves letters for them explaining his absence and begins his journey, driven by a sense of duty to his former servant.

  

Book 3

The Track of a Storm

Chapter 1: In Secret

In 1792, Charles Darnay travels to Paris, but his journey is interrupted when he is detained at the city’s gates. A group of drunken patriots forces him to go with them, and upon arrival, Darnay is arrested as an "emigrant Evrémonde." Despite his efforts to explain, he is taken to La Force prison, marked for imprisonment in secret, and left in a solitary, dark cell. The growing political unrest fills him with dread, and he thinks of his family as he waits for an uncertain fate.

 

Chapter 2: The Grindstone

Mr. Lorry, now in Paris, witnesses a grindstone being used by revolutionaries to sharpen weapons for executions. Lucie and Dr. Manette arrive, deeply distressed by Darnay’s imprisonment. Lucie is desperate for comfort, but her father, while trying to calm her, reflects on the violence surrounding them. Dr. Manette tries to use his connections to help Darnay, but the revolution’s chaos makes it difficult. Outside, the grindstone symbolizes the relentless bloodshed, and Lucie holds on to the hope that Darnay will be saved.

 

Chapter 3: The Shadow

Lucie’s plea for mercy for her husband is met with cold indifference from Madame Defarge, who represents the harsh spirit of the revolution. Madame Defarge expresses her resentment toward the aristocracy, showing no compassion for Lucie’s distress. Her unyielding bitterness casts a dark shadow over Lucie’s hope for a peaceful resolution, symbolizing the relentless vengeance driving the revolution.

Chapter 4: Calm in Storm

Dr. Manette continues to work tirelessly to help Darnay, using his influence at the Tribunal to secure his temporary release. Despite the horrors of the revolution, which include the executions of the royal family, Dr. Manette remains a source of strength for Lucie. His determination helps her cope with the storm of emotions and fear. Lucie, though shaken by the violence around them, finds some comfort in her father’s steadfast efforts.

 

Chapter 5: The Wood-Sawyer

Lucie’s daily life becomes more difficult as she tries to keep her family safe. One day, she encounters a wood-sawyer, a man who makes light of the executions with a chilling joke about using his "little guillotine" to behead people. Lucie is disturbed, but she does her best to keep peace with him. Meanwhile, the revolution intensifies, and Lucie sees the tumbrils—cartloads of condemned prisoners—making their way to the guillotine, reminding her of the ever-present threat of death hanging over Paris.

 

Chapter 6: Triumph

Charles Darnay’s name is on the list of prisoners to be taken before the Tribunal. After waiting in the Conciergerie, he is called before the court. Despite a hostile crowd and charges against him, Darnay defends himself, explaining that he gave up his title and station for a better life in England and returned to help a fellow citizen, Gabelle. Dr. Manette testifies in his favor, and the Tribunal acquits Darnay. The crowd celebrates his reprieve, but the revolution’s violence continues, and Darnay is relieved to be with his family.

 

Chapter 7: A Knock at the Door

Despite Darnay’s acquittal, the next evening armed men arrive at the Manettes' home to arrest him once again. Dr. Manette, who had been confident after the trial, is shocked. The men explain that Darnay has been denounced by the Defarges and another unknown person. Lucie is terrified, but Dr. Manette, though distressed, feels he has done all he can. Darnay is once again taken to the Conciergerie, marking the beginning of his uncertain fate.

 

Chapter 8: A Hand at Cards

Miss Pross and Jerry Cruncher encounter Solomon Pross, Miss Pross’s long-lost brother, in a wine shop. He now goes by the name Barsad and is revealed to be a spy. Jerry and Miss Pross are surprised by this revelation. Later, Sydney Carton meets with Barsad and blackmails him, revealing his past as an English spy. Carton uses the information to force Barsad to help him, as Darnay’s life is once again in jeopardy. Carton expresses his concern about Dr. Manette’s safety and plots to use Barsad to his advantage, preparing for the next steps.

 

Chapter 9: The Game Made

Mr. Jarvis Lorry is shocked to learn that Jerry Cruncher has been involved in body snatching. Jerry defends his actions, claiming that he’s simply earning a living and that even doctors might engage in dishonest practices. Lorry warns Jerry to repent and stop, though Jerry suggests a shift in his work toward becoming a gravedigger. Meanwhile, Sydney Carton and Jarvis Lorry have a heartfelt conversation. Carton tells Lorry that if things go wrong for Darnay, he can access the prisoner once. He advises Lorry not to tell Lucie about their conversation. Carton then leaves for La Force prison, where he meets a wood-sawyer who talks about recent executions. Carton later buys some items from a pharmacist, reflecting on the deaths around him. He recalls the Bible verse about resurrection and crosses the Seine to the better part of town, contemplating his life. At the Tribunal, Darnay is denounced by Monsieur Defarge, Madame Defarge, and Dr. Manette. A paper from Dr. Manette, detailing the crimes of the Evrémonde family, is read out, leading to Darnay’s condemnation to death.

Chapter 10: The Substance of the Shadow

The paper written by Dr. Manette recounts his tragic experiences with the Evrémonde brothers, detailing the abuse and death of a peasant family at their hands. The paper describes the horrible treatment of a young woman and her husband, leading to the boy’s death, and how the doctor witnessed it all. Dr. Manette’s letter denounces the Evrémondes and their crimes, leading to the doctor's imprisonment for ten years. The Tribunal reacts with fury as Darnay is condemned to die, and Madame Defarge rejoices, urging Dr. Manette to save his own life by condemning Darnay.

 

Chapter 11: Dusk

Lucie and Charles Darnay share a heartbreaking final moment before his execution, filled with love and farewells. Darnay expresses his understanding of Dr. Manette’s pain, given the doctor’s past sufferings. Afterward, Lucie faints, and Carton helps her, promising to be there for her. Lucie’s daughter clings to Carton, asking him to save her family. Carton visits Dr. Manette, asking him to use his influence, but realizes the futility of their efforts. Lorry tells Carton that there’s no hope left for Darnay.

 

Chapter 12: Darkness

Sydney Carton decides to visit the neighborhood of Saint Antoine, staying sober and preparing for what is to come. He overhears Madame Defarge and others discussing their desire to eradicate the Evrémonde family entirely. Madame Defarge reveals that the family she seeks revenge on is her own, as the Evrémondes were responsible for her family’s destruction. Carton, moved by her words, considers taking drastic action but decides against it. He returns to Tellson's Bank, where Lorry tells him that Dr. Manette is deeply distraught over the situation. Carton lays out a plan to help Lucie and her family, suspecting that Madame Defarge will continue to gather evidence against them.