I met a traveller from an antique land

Who said: ‘Two vast and trunkless legs of stone

Stand in the desert …. Near them, on the sand,

Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,

And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,

Tell that its sculptor well those passions read

Which yet survive stamped on these lifeless things,

The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:

And on the pedestal these words appear:

“My name is Ozymandias, king of king.

Look on my works, ye Might and despair!”

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare

The lone and level sands stretch far away’

                                                                Percy Bysshe Shelley(1792-1822)

Let’s look at the poem from my points of view.


This is a very well-known sonnet of Shelley. It is neither patrrarchan nor Shakespearean. But the picture is clear, and the message is artistic. It is a satire on the vanity of men. Man is nothing but an insignificant ant crawling on the earth. His ambitions are hollow, and his glory and greatness do not stand the test of time.

Once the poet met a traveller who told him the story of a broken statue which he saw in a desert of Egypt. He saw two hung legs of the statue carved out of stone. The inscription on the pedestal said that it was the statue of ozymandias, king of king. The expression on the face of the statue was realistic and revealed the character of the man and the skill of the sculptor. Anyone who looks at the ruins of the sculpture gains an insight into the character of both the king and the sculptor. From the frown on the face of the statue people can form an idea of the king’s authoritativeness and the sculptor’s insight into the king’s character. Both the king and the sculptor are no more, but their characters survive stamped on the ruins. When the traveller looked around he could find only vast stretches of sand and nothing else. Then he was reminded of the vanity of man.

As far as I am concerned, Shelly makes the traveller tell the story of the ruined statue. And then he allows the irony of fate, and stresses the hollowness of human glory and greatness.

A trveller from Egypt met the poet He told him that a broken statue of the king Ozymandias stood in the desert. Two vast, trunkless legs still stood on the pedestal. But the rest of the statue lay half-sunk in the sands. There were some lines carved on the base. They contained the king’s proud boast. They were a challenge to other kings: they should not hope to achieve his glory and greatness-they must only despair seeing his greatness and their own smallness.

But then the poet shows the irony of fate. Nothing has now remained of the statue: only the broken pieces lying in the bare endless desert. Time has proved the boast a total failure. Glory has greeted the grave. Pride has perished. Such is the fate of human vanity!

Furthermore, Shelley’s sonnet, Ozymandias, reveals the proud character of the king ozymandias of Egypt. He was proud and haughty. His face was always frowning and lips curved in a sneer of cold command. He believed that he was the greatest of great and none could match his greatness. So, frowning, sneering and commanding are the silent features of the character of Ozymandias. But by a strange irony of fate, all his greatness is lost and wiped out in lonely vast desert. Thus Time takes its revenge on this powerful and proud king who hoped for immorality.

As per my opinion, Shelley wants to show that even the mightiest of the mighty are bound to be forgotten in the course of time. Even a proud king like Ozymandias is just forgotten Even his statue is broken and the desert sand has covered his once great city. Thus, pride, greatness, etc are transitory things before the sweep of Time. Death is the great traveller and  Time has always the last laugh.

                                      By for now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                                                                          Tushar Brahmbhatt  M.A. (ELT)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ELT in Gujarat


Truly Truly Spectacular Term: ELT in Gujarat

 (Second Language at Secondary Level Learner)      

           ELT scene in Gujarat: After independence there was a rise in nationalistic feelings. There was appreciation of Indian culture and Language. Educationists wanted that Indian languages be made the medium of instruction beginning from primary to college level. People were emotionally charged and considered English as a vestige of slavery. Thus there was a strong undercurrent of anti-English sentiment, in 1960 the state Gujarat was formed .The language policy was influenced by gentian leaders. They considered using or encouraging English as unpatriotic. Ironically these very leaders sent their own children to expensive English medium school. The outcome of this thinking was disastrous. English was introduced rather late, that is from class 8th in the secondary level. Moreover, it was made optional at the board examination. This affected learning of English adversely in two ways. First, the late beginning created psychological problems for learners second; they were less enthusiastic to learn English because there was a provision of doing without it. In those days English was taught apparently through grammar translation method.

Later on English was introduced from class 5th optionally. That led to two groups of learners with different proficiency level in class 8th. English continued to be optional at the Board Examination and even at the college. There was no required amount of seriousness in teaching of English as it was relegated to an optional subject. In those days the structural approach was in vague and some oral work was introduced in the class.

H.M.Patel Institute of English set up in 1965 with the aim of “Let in Light” contributed a lot in promoting and updating English instruction in Gujarat. The institute earlier under the leadership of Subhash Jain fought for the course of English and tried hard to convince the people in Gujarat regarding the importance of English. It earned a good name on account of its training programmes, research, and its contribution to textbooks for English. Now it has IASE status and function as an advisory body to government of ELT. The state of Gujarat saw many positive changes in the attitude of the people as well as the language policy of Government, thereby in the textbook. The government of Gujarat made English compulsory from class 5th and offered state-wide training through DPEP scheme with the help of H.M.Patel Institute. The textbooks started following the functional approach. English was treated as a language of communication. More emphasis was given to oral work and more communication tasks were introduced. There was a kind of revolution in textbook. Now the textbooks were bigger in size with more pictures and activities and more learners friendly.

Earlier the Government was in favor of introducing English from class 1st as a compulsory subject. Later on due to political compulsions it decided to start from class 3rd. Another significance change was making English compulsory at the Secondary Board Examination from year 2007. There are all positive changes and the impact can be seen in the year to come, the whole generation of Gujarat learners suffered a lot due to the in consistent  language policy of the politicians after Independence.

                                                        Bye for Now!!!!!!



                                                         Tushar Brahmbhatt

                                          H.M.Patel Research Institute


Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment