Lost Spring

“Why do you do this?” I ask Saheb whom I encounter every morning

scrounging for gold in the garbage dumps of my neighbourhood. Saheb
left his home long ago. Set amidst the green fields of Dhaka, his home
is not even a distant memory. There were many storms that swept away
their fields and homes, his mother tells him. That’s why they left, looking
for gold in the big city where he now lives. “I have nothing else to do,” he
mutters, looking away. “Go to school,” I say glibly, realising immediately
how hollow the advice must sound. “There is no school in my
neighbourhood. When they build one, I will go.” “If I start a school, will you
come?” I ask, half-joking. “Yes,” he says, smiling broadly. A few days later I
see him running up to me. “Is your school ready?” “It takes longer to build
a school,” I say, embarrassed at having made a promise that was not
meant. But promises like mine abound in every corner of his bleak
world. After months of knowing him, I ask him his name. “Saheb-e Alam,”
he announces. He does not know what it means. If he knew its meaning —
lord of the universe — he would have a hard time believing it.
Unaware of what his name represents, he roams the streets with his
friends, an army of barefoot boys who appear like the morning birds
and disappear at noon. Over the months, I have come to recognise each
of them. “Why aren’t you wearing chappals?” I ask one. “My mother did
not bring them down from the shelf,” he answers simply. “Even if she
did he will throw them off,” adds another who is wearing shoes that do
not match. When I comment on it, he shuffles his feet and says nothing.
“I want shoes,” says a third boy who has never owned a pair all his life.
Travelling across the country I have seen children walking barefoot, in
cities, on village roads. It is not lack of money but a tradition to stay
barefoot, is one explanation. I wonder if this is only an excuse to explain
away a perpetual state of poverty. I remember a story a man from
Udipi once told me. As a young boy he would go to school past an old
temple, where his father was a priest. He would stop briefly at the temple
and pray for a pair of shoes. Thirty years later I visited his town and
the temple, which was now drowned in an air of desolation. In the
backyard, where lived the new priest, there were red and white plastic
chairs. A young boy dressed in a grey uniform, wearing socks and
shoes, arrived panting and threw his school bag on a folding bed. Looking
at the boy, I remembered the prayer another boy had made to the
goddess when he had finally got a pair of shoes, “Let me never lose
them.” The goddess had granted his prayer. Young boys like the son of the
priest now wore shoes. But many others like the ragpickers in my
neighbourhood remain shoeless. My acquaintance with the barefoot
ragpickers leads me to Seemapuri, a place on the periphery of Delhi
yet miles away from it, metaphorically. Those who live here are
squatters who came from Bangladesh back in 1971. Saheb’s family is
among them. Seemapuri was then a wilderness. It still is, but it is no
longer empty. In structures of mud, with roofs of tin and tarpaulin,
devoid of sewage, drainage or running water, live 10,000
ragpickers. They have lived here for more than thirty years without an
identity, without permits but with ration cards that get their names on
voters’ lists and enable them to buy grain. Food is more important for
survival than an identity. “If at the end of the day we can feed our families
and go to bed without an aching stomach, we would rather live here than
in the fields that gave us no grain,” say a group of women in tattered
saris when I ask them why they left their beautiful land of green fields
and rivers. Wherever they find food, they pitch their tents that
become transit homes. Children grow up in them, becoming partners in
survival. And survival in Seemapuri means rag-picking. Through the years,
it has acquired the proportions of a fine art. Garbage to them is gold. It
is their daily bread, a roof over their heads, even if it is a leaking roof.
But for a child it is even more. “I sometimes find a rupee, even a ten-
rupee note,” Saheb says, his eyes lighting up. When you can find a silver
coin in a heap of garbage, you don’t stop scrounging, for there is hope of
finding more. It seems that for children, garbage has a meaning different
from what it means to their parents. For the children it is wrapped in
wonder, for the elders it is a means of survival. One winter morning I
see Saheb standing by the fenced gate of the neighbourhood club,
watching two young men dressed in white, playing tennis. “I like the
game,” he hums, content to watch it standing behind the fence. “I go
inside when no one is around,” he admits. “The gatekeeper lets me use
the swing.” Saheb too is wearing tennis shoes that look strange over his
discoloured shirt and shorts. “Someone gave them to me,” he says in the
manner of an explanation. The fact that they are discarded shoes of
some rich boy, who perhaps refused to wear them because of a hole in
one of them, does not bother him. For one who has walked barefoot, even
shoes with a hole is a dream come true. But the game he is watching so
intently is out of his reach. This morning, Saheb is on his way to the milk
booth. In his hand is a steel canister. “I now work in a tea stall down the
road,” he says, pointing in the distance. “I am paid 800 rupees and all
my meals.” Does he like the job? I ask. His face, I see, has lost the
carefree look. The steel canister seems heavier than the plastic bag he
would carry so lightly over his shoulder. The bag was his. The canister
belongs to the man who owns the tea shop. Saheb is no longer his
own master!

Mukesh insists on being his own master. “I will be a motor mechanic,” he

announces. “Do you know anything about cars?” I ask. “I will learn to drive
a car,” he answers, looking straight into my eyes. His dream looms like a
mirage amidst the dust of streets that fill his town Firozabad, famous for
its bangles. Every other family in Firozabad is engaged in making
bangles. It is the centre of India’s glass-blowing industry where families
have spent generations working around furnaces, welding glass,
making bangles for all the women in the land it seems. Mukesh’s family
is among them. None of them know that it is illegal for children like him
to work in the glass furnaces with high temperatures, in dingy cells
without air and light; that the law, if enforced, could get him and all
those 20,000 children out of the hot furnaces where they slog their
daylight hours, often losing the brightness of their eyes. Mukesh’s eyes
beam as he volunteers to take me home, which he proudly says is being
rebuilt. We walk down stinking lanes choked with garbage, past
homes that remain hovels with crumbling walls, wobbly doors, no
windows, crowded with families of humans and animals coexisting in a
primeval state. He stops at the door of one such house, bangs a wobbly
iron door with his foot, and pushes it open. We enter a half-built shack.
In one part of it, thatched with dead grass, is a firewood stove over
which sits a large vessel of sizzling spinach leaves. On the ground, in
large aluminium platters, are more chopped vegetables. A frail young
woman is cooking the evening meal for the whole family. Through eyes
filled with smoke she smiles. She is the wife of Mukesh’s elder brother.
Not much older in years, she has begun to command respect as the bahu,
the daughter-in-law of the house, already in charge of three men — her
husband, Mukesh and their father. When the older man enters, she
gently withdraws behind the broken wall and brings her veil closer to her
face. As custom demands, daughters-in-law must veil their faces before
male elders. In this case the elder is an impoverished bangle maker.
Despite long years of hard labour, first as a tailor, then a bangle maker,
he has failed to renovate a house, send his two sons to school. All he
has managed to do is teach them what he knows — the art of making
bangles. “It is his karam, his destiny,” says Mukesh’s grandmother,
who has watched her own husband go blind with the dust from polishing
the glass of bangles. “Can a god-given lineage ever be broken?” she
implies. Born in the caste of bangle makers, they have seen nothing but
bangles — in the house, in the yard, in every other house, every other
yard, every street in Firozabad. Spirals of bangles — sunny gold, paddy
green, royal blue, pink, purple, every colour born out of the seven
colours of the rainbow — lie in mounds in unkempt yards, are piled on
four wheeled handcarts, pushed by young men along the narrow lanes
of the shanty town. And in dark hutments, next to lines of flames of
flickering oil lamps, sit boys and girls with their fathers and mothers,
welding pieces of coloured glass into circles of bangles. Their eyes are
more adjusted to the dark than to the light outside. That is why they
often end up losing their eyesight before they become adults. Savita, a
young girl in a drab pink dress, sits alongside an elderly woman,
soldering pieces of glass. As her hands move mechanically like the tongs
of a machine, I wonder if she knows the sanctity of the bangles she helps
make. It symbolises an Indian woman’s suhaag, auspiciousness in
marriage. It will dawn on her suddenly one day when her head is draped
with a red veil, her hands dyed red with henna, and red bangles
rolled onto her wrists. She will then become a bride. Like the old woman
beside her who became one many years ago. She still has bangles on her
wrist, but no light in her eyes. “Ek waqt ser bhar khana bhi nahin khaya,”
she says, in a voice drained of joy. She has not enjoyed even one full
meal in her entire lifetime — that’s what she has reaped! Her husband, an
old man with a flowing beard, says, “I know nothing except bangles. All I
have done is make a house for the family to live in.” Hearing him, one
wonders if he has achieved what many have failed in their lifetime. He has
a roof over his head! The cry of not having money to do anything
except carry on the business of making bangles, not even enough to
eat, rings in every home. The young men echo the lament of their
elders. Little has moved with time, it seems, in Firozabad. Years of mind-
numbing toil have killed all initiative and the ability to dream. “Why not
organise yourselves into a cooperative?” I ask a group of young men who
have fallen into the vicious circle of middlemen who trapped their fathers
and forefathers. “Even if we get organised, we are the ones who will be
hauled up by the police, beaten and dragged to jail for doing something
illegal,” they say. There is no leader among them, no one who could help
them see things differently. Their fathers are as tired as they are. They
talk endlessly in a spiral that moves from poverty to apathy to greed and
to injustice. Listening to them, I see two distinct worlds— one of the
family, caught in a web of poverty, burdened by the stigma of caste in
which they are born; the other a vicious circle of the sahukars, the
middlemen, the policemen, the keepers of law, the bureaucrats
and the politicians. Together they have imposed the baggage on the
child that he cannot put down. Before he is aware, he accepts it as
naturally as his father. To do anything else would mean to dare. And
daring is not part of his growing up. When I sense a flash of it in Mukesh I
am cheered. “I want to be a motor mechanic,’ he repeats. He will go to a
garage and learn. But the garage is a long way from his home. “I will
walk,” he insists. “Do you also dream of flying a plane?” He is suddenly
silent. “No,” he says, staring at the ground. In his small murmur there is
an embarrassment that has not yet turned into regret. He is content to
dream of cars that he sees hurtling down the streets of his town. Few
airplanes fly over Firozabad.

Looking for: Try to locate or discover

Slog their daylight hours: Struggle persistently during the daytime
Roof over his head: A place to live
Perpetual state of poverty: Endless impoverishment
Dark hutments: Encampment of huts devoid of any light
Imposed the baggage on the child: Force the profession on the child.

Summary
Meeting Saheb
 Every morning, the author meets Saheb-e-Alam, a young ragpicker
searching through garbage.
 Saheb migrated from Dhaka, Bangladesh with his family.
 Their village was repeatedly destroyed by floods and storms.
 They came to Delhi hoping for a better life.

Education – An Unfulfilled Dream

 The author asks Saheb why he does not attend school.
 Saheb replies that there is no school in his neighbourhood.
 The author jokingly promises to open a school.
 Saheb happily asks later whether the school is ready.
 The author realizes how casually promises are made to poor children
without being fulfilled.

Meaning of Saheb’s Name

 His full name is Saheb-e-Alam, meaning "Lord of the Universe."
 Ironically:
o He owns nothing.
o He survives by collecting garbage.
 The contrast shows the gap between his name and reality.

Barefoot Children
 Saheb and his friends roam barefoot.
 Some children explain:
o Their mothers forgot to bring down their slippers.
o Others say slippers are unnecessary.
  The author believes these are excuses hiding deep poverty.
 She recalls a priest who once prayed for shoes as a child.
 Even today many poor children remain barefoot.

Life in Seemapuri
 Seemapuri is a settlement on the outskirts of Delhi.
 Around 10,000 ragpickers live there.
 Most are migrants from Bangladesh who arrived after 1971.
 Their homes:
o Mud structures
o Tin and tarpaulin roofs
o No sewage, drainage, or clean water.
 Though they lack legal identity, they have ration cards and voting
rights.

Garbage – Means of Survival

 For adults:
o Garbage is a source of livelihood.
 For children:
o Garbage represents hope and adventure.
 Saheb often finds:
o Coins
o Occasionally ten-rupee notes.
 This motivates children to continue rag-picking.

Saheb’s Love for Tennis

 Saheb enjoys watching wealthy boys play tennis.
 He watches from outside the club fence.
 Sometimes the watchman lets him use the swing.
 He wears discarded tennis shoes given by someone.
  Even torn shoes are precious to him.

Saheb Gets a Job

 Later, Saheb starts working at a tea stall.
 He earns:
o ₹800 per month.
o Free meals.
 However:
o His cheerful personality disappears.
o He now carries a heavy steel container belonging to his
employer.
 Earlier:
o His rag-picking bag belonged to him.
 Now:
o He has become dependent and lost his freedom.

Introduction to Mukesh
 Mukesh belongs to Firozabad, famous for its glass bangles.
 His family has made bangles for generations.
 Unlike others, Mukesh dreams of becoming a motor mechanic.

Child Labour in Firozabad

 Around 20,000 children work in glass factories.
 They work:
o Near hot furnaces.
o In dark, airless rooms.
o Under dangerous conditions.
 Many lose their eyesight at a young age.

Visit to Mukesh’s Home

  Mukesh proudly takes the author to his house.
 The neighbourhood has:
o Dirty lanes.
o Garbage everywhere.
o Dilapidated houses.
 His home is:
o Small and poorly built.
o Crowded with family members.

Mukesh’s Family
 Mukesh lives with:
o His father
o Elder brother
o Sister-in-law
o Grandmother.
 His sister-in-law cooks for the family.
 She observes traditional customs like covering her face before
elders.

Generations of Poverty
 Mukesh’s father worked:
o As a tailor.
o Later as a bangle maker.
 Despite years of hard work:
o He remains poor.
o He cannot educate his sons.
 His grandmother believes:
o Making bangles is their destiny.
o Their caste determines their occupation.
Bangle Industry
 Firozabad is filled with:
o Glass furnaces.
o Colourful bangles.
o Workshops.
 Entire families work together.
 Children spend long hours welding glass bangles.

Savita – Another Child Worker

 Savita is a young girl making bangles.
 She works mechanically.
 She does not realize the cultural importance of bangles.
 One day she too will wear them as a bride.
 The elderly woman beside her still wears bangles but has lost her
eyesight.

Exploitation
 Workers earn very little despite lifelong labour.
 Poverty forces every generation into the same profession.
 They are trapped by:
o Moneylenders (Sahukars)
o Middlemen
o Policemen
o Bureaucrats
o Politicians.
 Even if workers try to organize, they fear police harassment.

Cycle of Poverty
 Children inherit:
o Poverty.
 o Debt.
o Caste-based occupations.
 They rarely dare to dream of a different future.
 Lack of education and opportunities keeps them trapped.

Mukesh’s Dream
 Mukesh refuses to accept his family's traditional occupation.
 He wants to:
o Learn driving.
o Become a motor mechanic.
 He is willing to walk a long distance to learn.
 When asked if he dreams of flying an airplane:
o He quietly says "No."
 His dreams remain modest but represent hope.

Ending
 The author contrasts:
o Saheb, whose freedom disappears after getting a job.
o Mukesh, who still dares to dream despite hardship.
 The chapter ends with a message that education, opportunity, and
courage are the keys to breaking the cycle of poverty and child
labour.

Theme & Extra

1. About the author – Anees Jung
Anees Jung (b. 1944) is an Indian author, journalist, and columnist known
for her sensitive portrayal of social realities—especially the lives of women
and children caught in cycles of poverty, tradition, and exploitation. Born
in Rourkela and raised in Hyderabad, she studied in both India and the
USA. Her writings combine literary elegance with journalistic authenticity.
Lost Spring: Stories of Stolen Childhood examines the lived realities of
children whose childhood is snatched away by socio-economic
deprivation.

2. About the title – Lost Spring

“Spring” symbolises youth, innocence, hope, freshness, and growth. When
childhood is taken away due to poverty, labour, or societal neglect, one
loses their “spring.”
Thus, the title metaphorically represents:
• Lost opportunities
• Stolen dreams
• Early exposure to hardship
• Childhood that never gets to bloom

3. Main theme
Both parts deal with the loss of childhood and the systematic exploitation
of poor children. The text critiques structural inequalities that deny
children education, dignity, and opportunities.

4. Sub-themes
• Migration and identity loss
• Child labour and generational poverty
• Exploitation under the guise of tradition
• Urban neglect and rural displacement
• Dreams vs. socio-economic constraints
• Class divide
• Systemic oppression by middlemen and politicians

5. Characters
Saheb-e-Alam
• A ragpicker boy; innocent, hopeful, trapped in poverty
Saheb’s Mother
• Represents the helplessness of migrant families
Narrator (Anees Jung)
• Empathetic observer of social realities
Tea Stall Owner
• Symbolises exploitation masked as employment
Ragpicker Children
• Collective symbol of lost childhood
Mukesh
• A young boy with a dream of becoming a motor mechanic
Mukesh’s Family
• Trapped in the hereditary bangle-making industry
Mukesh’s Grandmother
• Believes destiny cannot be changed
Sahukars, Politicians, Policemen
• The exploitative nexus controlling poor workers
Savita
• Young girl making bangles; symbolic of blind tradition
Old Woman
• Represents lifelong suffering and broken dreams

Questions

1. What is Saheb looking for in the garbage dumps? Where is he and

where has he come from?
Ans:

2. What explanations does the author offer for the children not wearing
footwear?
Ans:

3. Is Saheb happy working at the tea-stall? Explain.

Ans:

4. What makes the city of Firozabad famous?

Ans:

5. Mention the hazards of working in the glass bangles industry.

Ans:
6. How is Mukesh’s attitude to his situation different from that of his
family?
Ans:

7. What could be some of the reasons for the migration of people from
villages to cities?
Ans: -----

8. Would you agree that promises made to poor children are rarely kept?
Why do you think this happens in the incidents narrated in the text?
Ans:

9. What forces conspire to keep the workers in the bangle industry of

Firozabad in poverty?
Ans:

10. How, in your opinion, can Mukesh realise his dream?

Ans:

11. Mention the hazards of working in the glass bangles industry.

Ans:

12. Why should child labour be eliminated and how?

Ans: -----

More

1. What does Saheb search for in the garbage? How does his name create
irony?
Ans: Saheb searches for useful items, coins, and valuables in the
garbage to earn a living. His name, Saheb-e-Alam, means "Lord of
the Universe," which is ironic because he is an impoverished
ragpicker with nothing.
2. How does Saheb’s carefree smile deepen the tragedy of his condition?
Ans: Saheb's innocent smile shows that he accepts his poverty
without complaint. His happiness despite hardship highlights the
tragedy of a child deprived of education, security, and a normal
childhood.

3. What type of settlement is Seemapuri?

Ans: Seemapuri is a slum settlement on the outskirts of Delhi,
inhabited mainly by Bangladeshi migrants living in temporary
huts without proper sanitation, drainage, or basic facilities.

4. What has ragpicking become for children? Why does the narrator call it
“art”?
Ans: For children, ragpicking is both a means of survival and a
source of hope and adventure. The narrator calls it an "art"
because the ragpickers have become highly skilled at finding
valuable items in garbage over the years.

5. Why don’t Seemapuri children attend school?

Ans: The children do not attend school because of poverty, lack of
schools nearby, and the need to work to support their families.

6. Why are children barefoot?

Ans: The children are barefoot because their families cannot
afford shoes. People often call it a tradition, but the narrator
believes it is actually a sign of deep poverty.

7. Why is garbage “gold” for ragpickers?

Ans: Garbage is "gold" because it provides food, shelter, and
income. Sometimes it contains coins or valuable objects, giving
the ragpickers hope of earning more.

8. Where does Saheb work? Why is the canister “heavier”?

Ans: Saheb works at a tea stall, earning ₹800 a month and meals.
The steel canister is "heavier" because it symbolizes
responsibility, loss of freedom, and his burden as a child labourer.

09. What is Mukesh’s dream? Why is his dream unusual for someone from
Firozabad?
Ans: Mukesh dreams of becoming a motor mechanic. His dream is
unusual because children in Firozabad are expected to continue
the family tradition of making bangles.

10. What health problems are common among bangle-makers?

Ans: Bangle-makers often suffer from poor eyesight, blindness,
respiratory diseases, burns, and other health problems caused by
working in hot, smoky, and poorly ventilated factories.

11. Why do children work in such hazardous spaces?

Ans: Children work in hazardous spaces because of poverty,
family tradition, and lack of education. Their families depend on
their earnings for survival.

12. What type of work do women do in bangle making?

Ans: Women solder and join coloured glass pieces to make
bangles while working long hours in dark, unhealthy conditions.

13. Why do the women not complain about their condition?

Ans: The women accept their suffering as fate. Poverty, social
customs, lack of education, and generations of exploitation
prevent them from protesting.

14. Who are the members of the exploitative nexus?

Ans: The exploitative nexus includes the sahukars
(moneylenders), middlemen, policemen, bureaucrats, and
politicians, who together exploit the poor workers.

15. Why are workers unable to form cooperatives or unions?

Ans: The workers are unable to form cooperatives because they
fear harassment by the police and exploitation by middlemen.
Poverty, illiteracy, and lack of leadership also prevent them from
organizing themselves.

16. Why did Saheb’s family migrate from Dhaka to Seemapuri?

Ans: Saheb’s family left Dhaka because frequent storms
destroyed their fields and homes, leaving them with nothing to
survive on. Hoping for food and a secure livelihood, they migrated
to Delhi and settled in Seemapuri.

17. What does garbage symbolise for the ragpickers of Seemapuri?

Ans: For ragpickers, garbage is a means of survival. It represents
hope, income, and even small discoveries that brighten their day.
While worthless to others, for them it is “gold” that keeps their
families alive.

18. Why is working in glass furnaces dangerous for children?

Ans: Children work long hours in dark, congested rooms filled
with toxic fumes and extreme heat. Constant exposure damages
their eyes and lungs, often leading to early blindness and lasting
health problems.

19. How is Mukesh different from the rest of his family?

Ans: Unlike his family, who accept bangle-making as destiny,
Mukesh wants to escape the hereditary cycle. He dreams of
becoming a motor mechanic and is willing to work hard to achieve
something different in life.

20. What does the phrase “web of poverty” mean in the context of
Firozabad?
Ans: The “web of poverty” refers to the exploitative system of
sahukars, middlemen, police, and politicians who trap bangle-
makers in debt and fear. This network prevents them from
breaking free or improving their lives.

21. Discuss the theme of child labour and lost childhood in Lost Spring.
Ans: Lost Spring highlights how poverty destroys childhood
dreams. In Part I, Saheb, a ragpicker, spends his days scrounging
garbage instead of attending school. His name, ironically meaning
“Lord of the Universe,” reflects the gap between identity and
reality. In Part II, children in Firozabad work in hazardous glass
furnaces, inhaling toxic fumes and risking blindness. They inherit
this occupation without choice. Both stories expose how economic
hardship, migration, social neglect, and exploitation rob children
of education, safety, and innocence. Anees Jung uses vivid
imagery and irony to show how tradition and poverty force
children into labour, leaving no room for freedom or growth. The
chapter urges society to recognise and fight these injustices.

22. Compare and contrast the childhoods of Saheb and Mukesh.

Ans: Saheb and Mukesh both belong to poor families, but their
struggles differ. Saheb is a migrant ragpicker whose family fled
Dhaka after storms destroyed their livelihood. He searches
garbage for survival, longing for school but never receiving real
opportunity. Mukesh, however, belongs to a family trapped in
generations of bangle-making in Firozabad. He works in
suffocating conditions but dares to dream of becoming a motor
mechanic. Saheb’s freedom disappears when he takes up a job at
a tea stall, symbolising lost childhood. Mukesh, on the other
hand, holds onto hope despite oppressive surroundings. While
both suffer due to systemic poverty, Mukesh shows determination
to escape his inherited fate.

23. Examine the symbolism of shoes and bangles in the text.

Ans: Shoes in Part I symbolise dignity, opportunity, and economic
stability. Barefoot children reflect poverty disguised as
“tradition.” When a temple donates shoes, it highlights unequal
progress—some benefit, others do not. Bangles in Part II
symbolise tradition, marital expectations, and confinement.
Though colourful and beautiful, they hide the misery of the
workers who make them. Women sit in dark rooms joining glass
circles, their futures as fragile as the bangles themselves.
Bangles also represent the vicious circle of poverty— unchanging,
repetitive, and binding. Together, shoes and bangles reveal the
social reality of India where beauty is produced by the suffering
poor.
24. How does social structure and tradition perpetuate poverty in
Firozabad?
Ans: In Firozabad, social structure and tradition work together to
trap families in hereditary labour. Children are born into bangle-
making, and society expects them to continue it. Women believe
it is their “god-given lineage,” showing internalised fatalism. The
economic system further strengthens this trap: sahukars,
middlemen, politicians, and corrupt police form a nexus that
keeps workers indebted and fearful. Anyone who tries to organise
resistance is threatened or punished. Poor education, lack of
alternative jobs, weak law enforcement, and cultural pressure
prevent children from dreaming beyond their caste-assigned
roles. As a result, poverty becomes a cycle passed from one
generation to the next.

25. Explain how hope functions as a central theme in Lost Spring.

Ans: Despite overwhelming poverty, hope appears as a quiet but
powerful theme. Saheb initially finds tiny joys in garbage and
dreams vaguely of school, showing that children naturally hope.
However, his hope fades when he takes a job and loses freedom.
In contrast, Mukesh’s hope is stronger and more defined. His
dream of becoming a mechanic represents resistance against
generational poverty and hereditary labour. Even though he lives
in a bleak environment filled with exploitation and darkness, he
believes in change. Anees Jung highlights that hope—in however
small a form—is what keeps individuals aspiring for a better life.
The presence of hope makes the characters human, not just
victims.

1. Saheb’s family left Dhaka due to—

a) Violence
b) Storms destroying their fields
c) Lack of schools
d) Job opportunities elsewhere

2. Garbage is considered “gold” because—

a) It is colourful
b) It provides livelihood
c) Children enjoy playing with it
d) It contains valuable metals

3. The narrator feels embarrassed because—

a) She cannot help Saheb
 b) She made a false promise of school
c) Saheb questions her
d) She dislikes ragpickers

4. The Udipi temple story highlights—

a) Modernisation
b) Economic inequality
c) Prayer rituals
d) Child labour

5. Shoes represent—
a) Fashion
b) Dignity and economic stability
c) Culture
d) Rebellion

6. Seemapuri residents value—

a) Identity cards
b) Ration cards
c) Land ownership
d) Citizenship

7. Saheb’s job at the tea stall makes him—

a) Wealthy
b) Lose freedom
c) More educated
d) Respectful

8. Firozabad is known for—

a) Gold work
b) Bangles
c) Pottery
d) Weaving

9. Child labour continues in Firozabad because—

a) Children prefer it
b) Laws are poorly enforced
c) Factories need more workers
d) Families refuse to send children to school

10. Working in glass furnaces is harmful because—

a) Children dislike heat
b) It is time-consuming
c) Toxic fumes damage eyes and lungs
d) It requires training
11. Bangles symbolise—
a) Marriage and tradition
b) Poverty
c) Education
d) Modern life

12. Women working in bangle-making—

a) Work in safe rooms
b) Work in dark, suffocating spaces
c) Work outdoors
d) Are well-paid

13. Mukesh differs from his family because he—

a) Refuses work
b) Wants to break tradition
c) Wants to study abroad
d) Wants to join politics

14. The “vicious circle” refers to—

a) Marriage customs
b) Traditional games
c) Interconnected forces trapping workers in poverty
d) School system

15. The exploitative nexus includes—

a) Teachers
b) Politicians, sahukars, middlemen
c) Doctors
d) Artists

16. The narrator’s tone in the chapter is—

a) Humorous
b) Critical yet empathetic
c) Indifferent
d) Sarcastic

17. The colourful bangles contrast with—

a) Rich traders
b) The dark lives of workers
c) Beautiful festivals
d) Market stalls

18. Mukesh’s dream is significant because—

a) It is unrealistic
b) It challenges hereditary bondage
 c) His family forces him
d) It is common in Firozabad

19. Poverty persists because—

a) People are lazy
b) Systems deliberately exploit the poor
c) Education is free
d) Jobs are easy

20. “Can a god-given lineage ever be broken?” expresses—

a) Rebellion
b) Fatalism
c) Anger
d) Celebration

PYQ
1. Describe the circumstances that forced Saheb’s family to leave Dhaka.
Ans: Saheb’s family was forced to leave Dhaka because repeated
storms and floods destroyed their fields and home. They lost their
means of livelihood and suffered from extreme poverty and
hunger. In search of food and survival, they migrated to Delhi,
where they settled in Seemapuri and survived by rag-picking.

2. How is the life of ragpickers in Seemapuri a symbol of lost childhood?

Ans: The children of Seemapuri lose their childhood because they
are forced to work as ragpickers instead of going to school or
playing. Poverty compels them to search for garbage to support
their families. Their dreams remain unfulfilled, and they grow up
too soon, making their lives a symbol of lost innocence and
childhood.

3. Discuss the significance of bangles as a central symbol in the story.

Ans: Bangles symbolize both beauty and suffering. While they
represent an Indian woman's marriage, prosperity, and tradition,
they also symbolize the endless cycle of poverty and exploitation
faced by the bangle makers of Firozabad. For the workers,
bangles are not ornaments but a source of hardship, child labour,
poor health, and lifelong struggle.
4. Why is the bangle-making industry described as a vicious circle?
Ans: The bangle-making industry is called a vicious circle because
generations of families remain trapped in poverty, debt, and child
labour. The workers are exploited by middlemen, moneylenders,
and corrupt officials. They lack education, opportunities, and
freedom to choose another profession, forcing each generation to
continue the same difficult work.

5. Compare the personalities of Saheb and Mukesh with reference to their

dreams.
Ans: Saheb is a ragpicker from Seemapuri who has surrendered to
his fate. He lives in the present and eventually accepts a job at a
tea stall, losing his freedom and the carefree look on his face. He
is no longer his own master.
In contrast, Mukesh, a boy from a bangle-making family in
Firozabad, is a rebel. He dreams of becoming a motor mechanic.
Unlike Saheb, Mukesh shows the courage to break away from his
family lineage and traditional occupation.

(i) Saheb represents resignation. He accepts the burden of

poverty and the steel canister as his destiny.
(ii) Mukesh represents hope and determination. He wants to go to
a garage and learn, even though it is far from his home. He
refuses to let his circumstances crush his aspirations.