Students, this post of KhulkarSeekhen provides solutions for Class 10th English First Flight poem A Tiger in the Zoo by Leslie Norris. I recommend first read the summary of A Tiger in the Zoo to understand Thinking about the Poem A Tiger in the Zoo Questions better.
This poem contrasts a tiger in the zoo with the tiger in its natural habitat. The poem moves from the zoo to the jungle, and back again to the zoo.
Poet: Leslie Norris | Glossary: snarls – makes an angry, warning sound
Before the Poem Question
Which stanzas speak about the tiger in the zoo, and which about the tiger in the jungle?
- In the zoo: stanzas 1, 4 and 5.
- In the jungle: stanzas 2 and 3.
The poem thus moves from the cage to the jungle and back again to the cage.
A Tiger in the Zoo Thinking about the Poem Question Answer
Q.1. (i) Words describing the movements and actions of the tiger
| In the cage | In the wild |
|---|---|
| stalks (only a few steps) | lurking in shadow |
| on pads of velvet quiet | sliding through long grass |
| in his quiet rage | snarling around houses |
| locked in a concrete cell | baring his white fangs and claws |
| stalking the length of his cage | terrorising the village |
| ignoring visitors | |
| hears the last voice at night; stares at the stars |
Q.1. (ii) Words describing the two places
| The cage | The wild |
|---|---|
| few steps of his cage | shadow |
| concrete cell | long grass |
| behind bars | water hole where plump deer pass |
| visitors | houses at the jungle’s edge |
| patrolling cars | the village |
How the poet contrasts the two situations: In the cage everything is small, hard and man-made: a “concrete cell”, bars, “a few steps”, staring visitors and patrolling cars. In the jungle everything is open, living and free: shadows, long grass, a water hole, plump deer, a whole village to terrorise. The tiger’s own words change with the place too: in the jungle he would be snarling, baring, terrorising – active verbs full of power; in the cage he only stalks, ignores and stares. His strength has not gone; it has simply been locked up. The contrast makes the reader feel how cruel captivity is for a wild creature.
Q.2. What is the effect of the repetition in “quiet… quiet” and “brilliant… brilliant”?
“On pads of velvet quiet, / In his quiet rage”: the repetition sharpens a contrast. The tiger’s steps are soft and silent, but inside him burns a silent, helpless anger. It shows that his fury has no outlet; it can only be suppressed.
“His brilliant eyes / At the brilliant stars”: repeating the word links the tiger’s shining eyes with the shining stars, and so links the caged animal with the free, endless sky he can only look at. It suggests his longing for the freedom that lies far beyond his bars.
In both cases the repetition also gives the lines emphasis, rhythm and a musical quality that makes them stay in the mind.
Q.3. Are zoos necessary for the protection or conservation of some species? Are they useful for educating the public? Are there alternatives to zoos?
In favour of zoos: they protect endangered species from poachers and from loss of habitat, run breeding programmes that have saved animals from extinction, provide medical care to sick and injured animals, and allow children who will never visit a forest to see wild animals and learn to value them. Zoos also support scientific research.
Against zoos: a cage can never replace a jungle. Animals lose their natural instincts, become dull and depressed, and often fall ill or die early. Keeping a creature captive for our entertainment cannot be justified, as all three poems in the exercise show Norris’s tiger stares at the stars, Niblett’s tiger keeps growling, and Rilke’s panther paces in circles with a “mighty will” left paralysed.
Alternatives: national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, biosphere reserves and open safari parks, where animals live in their natural habitat under protection; also documentaries, virtual tours and 3-D exhibits for educating the public.
Q.4. Take a point of view for or against zoos (a couple of paragraphs)
Sample answer (against zoos): I believe zoos, as we usually know them, cannot be justified. A tiger in a concrete cell is not a tiger at all. Leslie Norris captures this exactly: the animal has strength but nowhere to use it, rage but no way to express it, and eyes that can do nothing but stare at distant stars. We call it education, but what a child actually learns at a zoo is that a magnificent animal can be reduced to an exhibit that ignores its visitors.
At the same time, I do not think the answer is to abandon wild animals to poachers and shrinking forests. The answer is to change the form of protection. National parks and sanctuaries such as Corbett, Ranthambore, Kaziranga and Gir show that animals can be guarded without being caged, and that people can watch them without owning them. Where an injured or orphaned animal genuinely cannot survive in the wild, a large, natural enclosure with proper care is acceptable. But a small barred cage in the middle of a city belongs to the past, and the sooner we replace it, the better it will be for both the animal and our own conscience.
