TEXTUAL QUESTIONS
1. They burn down forests. They do not
give back to nature adequately.
2. The poem gains more force as the farmers
themselves speak about their destructive
methods to gain money. The poet does not
criticize the farmers alone but makes us share
the guilt and he collectively talks about the
human race rather than the farmers as a group.
The poem is more effective as the blame is
taken by the farmers in an ironical way.
3.They do no hard work but live a life of
luxury. Car, television and fridge. They
say they have worked hard to gain the
material benefits with scant regard for
nature. The poet does not agree with this
way of thinking. This is ironical as they
work hard to produce this negative results
4. It is something to be ashamed of as we
tamper with nature unmindful of the
consequences. The animals and birds lose
their homes and we leave barren land for
future generations. The ecological balance
is affected. The trees are burnt to ashes by
the greedy farmers to make way for more
agricultural land
5. We devastate nature and give her nothing to
compensate for the loss. The reasoning is wrong on
two grounds. Firstly, nature has endowed us with her
bounty still we do not give her anything in return.
Secondly, the earth is not ours alone as it belongs to
every creature of God. If we continue to misuse our
land irresponsibly, we will leave an infertile earth as a
legacy to the coming generations. We are self-
centered and short-sighted and deplete the natural
resources of the land out of ignorance. They make
money by building houses in the place instead.
6.Stanzas 3 and 6 sum up the poet's
comment that materialism has taken over
love for nature and our indebtedness to
her.

Harvest hymn

  • 1.
  • 2.
    1. They burndown forests. They do not give back to nature adequately.
  • 3.
    2. The poemgains more force as the farmers themselves speak about their destructive methods to gain money. The poet does not criticize the farmers alone but makes us share the guilt and he collectively talks about the human race rather than the farmers as a group. The poem is more effective as the blame is taken by the farmers in an ironical way.
  • 4.
    3.They do nohard work but live a life of luxury. Car, television and fridge. They say they have worked hard to gain the material benefits with scant regard for nature. The poet does not agree with this way of thinking. This is ironical as they work hard to produce this negative results
  • 5.
    4. It issomething to be ashamed of as we tamper with nature unmindful of the consequences. The animals and birds lose their homes and we leave barren land for future generations. The ecological balance is affected. The trees are burnt to ashes by the greedy farmers to make way for more agricultural land
  • 6.
    5. We devastatenature and give her nothing to compensate for the loss. The reasoning is wrong on two grounds. Firstly, nature has endowed us with her bounty still we do not give her anything in return. Secondly, the earth is not ours alone as it belongs to every creature of God. If we continue to misuse our land irresponsibly, we will leave an infertile earth as a legacy to the coming generations. We are self- centered and short-sighted and deplete the natural resources of the land out of ignorance. They make money by building houses in the place instead.
  • 7.
    6.Stanzas 3 and6 sum up the poet's comment that materialism has taken over love for nature and our indebtedness to her.