Discussion of the text

1. In what key is the story written? Does is present a serious or a mocking account of the interview given by the author to the newspaper man? Give a general definition of the story.

2. Comment on the personality of the newspaper reporter. In what terms does the author describe him?

3. What newspaper did he represent? How does its name the “Daily Thunderstorm: contribute to the general tenor of the story? Is it a common name for a newspaper? Does it help us to a better understanding of the author’s irony?

4. What reason did the newspaper man give for interviewing the author? What are the connotations of the word “notorious”? How does is differ from the word “famous”? Is it suggestive of the author’s attitude towards the American Press? What tastes did it cater for – low or refined?

5. How does Mark Twain achieve a parody on the American Press, its ways, its shallowness, its vulgarity?

6. One of the devices characterizing Mark Twain’s comic art is a pretence of imbecility. Find passages illustrative of this.

7. What other devices of creating a humorous effect could be found in the story – exaggerations, the contrast between the subject and style (a mock-serious manner of treating the most absurd notions, etc.)? Quote the text for illustrations.

8. What was the author’s reaction to the remark of the interviewer “…you do not look as – as intelligent as I had expected you would”? Did he take offence or did he take it as a compliment? How does this absurd reaction contribute to the comic effect?

9. Where does the story reach its climax? Where is its absurdity at the apogee?

10. Comment on the use of the word “defunct”, which is a legal term. What effect does it create in this context?

11. Note the reiteration of the words “remarkable” and “extraordinary” in the story. Is their use justified? Do they really qualify clever thoughts and ideas or do they refer to the most absurd notions ever expressed? What sides of the interview do they help to bring out?

12. Comment on the concluding lines. What could be said about the connotations of the words “reverently” and “withdraw”? Are they in keeping with the nature of the scene described? Is their use in line with the other devices aimed at creating a comic effect?

13. Speak of the choice of vocabulary in the story. Comment on the use of colloquialisms side by side with sentimental turns of speech and high-flown words.

14. Speak of the syntax, paying attention to the peculiarities of spoken English.

15. Give a summary of your comments on the text.

The citadel by Archibald Joseph Cronin

Archibald Joseph Cronin (1896-1981), a modern English writer, was born in Scotland; after graduating form Glasgow University in 1919, he practiced medicine in South Wales and later in London. His first novel, The Hatter’s Castle, was a great success and enabled him to give up his profession as a doctor and devote his life to writing.

Among his best known books are The Stars Look Down, The Citadel, The Green Years, Shannon’s Way and The Northern Light. They are written in the best traditions of English critical realism. In The Citadel Cronin exposed the rotten system of medical service in England. The main character, Andrew Manson, and his friends, Dr. Hope, Philip Denny, Boland, Stillman, struggle against the falsehood and corruption of the medical system and against unprofessionalism of some doctors, for whom making money is the main thing. For this they try to have him erased from the Medical Registrar.

The extract below deals with the meeting of the Medical Council where Andrew Manson’s fate was solved.

Andrew went out with the rest. Now his recklessness was gone and his head, his whole body, was throbbing like an overtaxed machine. The atmosphere of the council chamber stifled him. He could not endure the presence of Horner, Boland, Mary, and the other witnesses. He dreaded especially that melancholy reproach on the face of his solicitor. He knew he had behaved like a fool, a wretched declamatory fool. Now he saw his honesty as sheer madness. Yes, it was madness to attempt to harangue the Council as he had done. He ought to have been not a doctor but a stump orator in Hyde Park. Well! Soon he would cease to be a doctor. They would simply wipe him off the list.

He went into the cloakroom, desiring only to be alone, and sat on the edge of one of the washbasins, mechanically feeling for a cigarette. But the smoke was tasteless on his parched tongue and he crushed the cigarette beneath his heel. It was strange, despite the hard things, the true things he had said of the profession a few moments ago, how miserable he should feel at being cast out from it. He realized that he might find work with Stillman. But this was not the work he wanted. No! He wished to be with Denny and Hope, to develop his own bent, drive the spearhead of his scheme into the hide of apathy and conservatism. But all this must be done from within the profession; it could never, in England, never, never, be accomplished from outside. Now Denny and Hope must man the Trojan horse¹ alone. A great wave of bitterness swept over him. The future stretched our before him desolately. He had already that most painful sense

of all, the feeling of exclusion; and allied to it, the knowledge that he was finished, done for – this was the end.

The sound of people moving in the corridor brought him wearily to his feet. As he joined them and re-entered the council chamber, he told himself sternly that only one thing remained to him. He must not grovel. He prayed that he would give no sign of subservience, of weakness. With his eyes fixed firmly on the floor immediately before him, he saw no one, gave no glance towards the high table, remained passive, motionless. All the trivial sounds of the room re-echoed maddeningly about him – the scraping of chairs, the coughing, whispering, even the incredible sound of someone tapping idly with a pencil.

But suddenly there was silence. A spasm of rigidity took hold of Andrew. Now, he thought, now it is coming!

The President spoke. He spoke slowly, impressively.

“Andrew Manson, I have to inform you that the Council has given very careful consideration to the charge brought against you and to the evidence brought in support of it. The Council is of opinion that, despite the peculiar circumstances of the case and your own particularly unorthodox presentation of it, you were acting in good faith and were sincerely desirous of complying with the spirit of the law demanding a high standard of professional conduct. I have to inform you, accordingly, that the Council has not seen fit to direct the Registrar to erase your name.”

For one dazed second he did not comprehend. Then a sudden shivering thrill passed over him. They had not struck him off. He was free, clear, vindicated.