A different history

Note that the poet has done this purposely to accentuate the action described. Similar to
when you kick a book, the sentence suddenly shifts to the right, as if you have kicked it
into that position. In the same way when you slam a book hard on a table or toss it
carelessly across the room you move the book, although perhaps not as far if you had
kicked it, thus the exaggerated indentation in the first line.
Similarly, the whole of the second stanza is indented. This shows perhaps a form of
limitation or segregation between the two.
The first stanza represents the ones unaffected by globalization and the western society
and people who maintained their original culture.
The second stanza represents those who chose to migrate are bound to or favor the expat
or international or western culture.
Note that although the degree of indentation is different, the border is the same. This
means that the second stanza has less line space. This perhaps can address the issue
that the thinking of the next generation is narrower and less open minded. It also shows
how little in breath they know about their society and their heritage, especially one as rich
as India.
Assonance. This means that we can find internal syllables rhyming with each other. Note
the word book, foot, room, wood, swooping. The significance of it being that
perhaps with globalization, you still retain some of your heritage, which still allows you to
be saved. Note how the four oo sounds can be found in the first stanza, while the last
one is only found at the end. Perhaps this can be used as an index to show your level of
knowledge of your past. Similarly, it can mean that you never really truly forget your
culture, but perhaps lose a bit or remember little, no matter how much you are influenced
by globalization, colonization or one of globalization. Especially in places like America, a
lot of the Asians are westernized, but keep parts of their heritage alive, perhaps like eating
Chinese food or something.
Free verse.
This demonstrates the fact that the poem is a completely free and is basically used to vent
the poets opinions on the matter. She perhaps is saying that her opinion belongs to her
and she just wishes to express them onto the world. She could perhaps be saying that she
is not right, nor is she saying that globalization is necessarily a bad thing.
On the other hand, she could be saying that globalization or westernization is a completely
different thing, a phenomena that humans have not ever experienced in the history of us
living together. It breaks all conventions, as it has never been done before, similar to how
this poem, with its free verse and peculiar paragraphing, breaks all conventions of a typical
poem.
The whole poem is in English. This completely contradicts the fact that she is ranting about
the change in culture and language and the horrible effects of the globalization when she
is speaking the language caused by it. She is in this way putting herself not on the
pedestal but beside it, saying that she is one of the stupid urbanization people to create an
empathy link between the reader and the poet, perhaps making it look as if we can do
this together kind of image. She is putting herself in the humble position.
Text level analysis
Great Pan is not dead; he simply emigrated to India Take note that Great Pan is the only
God ever died in Roman history. What she is saying here is that he is not dead, but
actually emigrated to India. Take note that people tend to migrate to places that are more

beneficial to us, showcasing the fact that India is a beautiful place to go to live your life.
She goes on to talk about this in the next line.
Here the gods roam freely; disguised as snakes or monkeys we can find juxtaposition
here. How can one roam freely if you have to disguise yourself as something else? This
once again relates to globalization. Note that Pan is a Greek God and he has moved to
India. Similarly, it can perhaps show that foreigners are allowed to roam freely and have
been for many years, as long as they do not make their presence known. They do not
separate themselves from the local people nor do they treat themselves any differently.
Therefore they adopt the culture of the people and act accordingly, similar to how the Gods
have to be succumb to be one of the animals that can be usually found in India (such as
the snakes and monkeys) Become one of the crowd, and you will live a happy life.
Here she continues her description, using the word sacred, relating to the divinity of the
area, as if the area was a garden for Gods. However, she starts becoming negatives and
starts listing what not to do. She uses the contrasting word, sin, to exemplify the vast
contrast between the two and to make what you are not allowed to do a mortal sin,
something that is almost a tragedy to do. Once again, note the repetition of the word sin,
once again amplifying how terrible it is to do such a thing. At the end she explains her
actions that we must learn to respect books and use them in such a way that would make
Sarasvati, the God of the arts, happy. The poet obviously treats poetry as an art so it
would be normal for her to be mentioned. Books, of course, hold history, and she is
basically saying that we should respect our history.
This is obviously an attack on the morals of every man in India, basically by trying to get
them guilty. Of course here she is saying that the something-izers have caused a lot of
turmoil in a country that was otherwise very happy before. They have tortured us and
made us do things we didnt like (after the torture, after the soul has been cropped with a
long scythe swooping out of the conquerors face-)perhaps either physically or mentally, or
both. Why is it that after all this time that the next generation (unborn grandchildren) is
going to grow up in that strange language? This demonstrates the despair in the heart of
the poet as she already knows that the children are about to adopt the language of the
foreigners, perhaps because the father or mother have already grown to love that
language because it is already so deeply ingrained into the minds of the people that make
up the society. They dont even know how to talk their own native language anymore. The
fact that she mentions grandchild illustrates the fact that she is talking to the elders, the
ones most considered wise in almost every society. This shows that she is talking to them,
indicating that getting an audience with them is hard and that only people with relevant
arguments can arrange a meeting with them, making her argument a very significant one.