CUET English 2026 PYQs26 May Shift 1. Free, no login required.

One of the main characteristics of tribal arts is their distinct manner of constructing space and imagery, which might be described as 'hallucinatory'. In both oral and visual forms of representation, tribal artists seem to interpret verbal and pictorial space as demarcated by an extremely flexible 'frame'. The boundaries between art and non-art become almost invisible. A tribal epic can begin its narration from a trivial everyday event; tribal paintings merge with living space as if the two were one and the same. And within the narrative itself, or within the painted imagery, there is no deliberate attempt to follow a sequence. The episodes retold and the images created, take on the apparently chaotic shapes of dreams. In a tribal Ramayan, an episode from the Mahabharata makes a sudden and surprising appearance; tribal paintings contain a curious mixture of traditional and modern imagery. In a way, the syntax of language and the grammar of painting are the same, as if literature were painted words and painting were a song of images.

Yet, it is not safe to assume that the tribal arts do not employ any ordering principles. On the contrary, the ordering principles are very strict. The most important among these is convention. Though the casual spectator may not notice, every tribal performance and creation has at its back another such performance or creation belonging to a previous occasion. The creativity of the tribal artist lies in adhering to the past while at the same time slightly subverting it. The subversions are more playful than ironic.

One of the main characteristics of tribal arts is their distinct manner of constructing space and imagery, which might be described as 'hallucinatory'. In both oral and visual forms of representation, tribal artists seem to interpret verbal and pictorial space as demarcated by an extremely flexible 'frame'. The boundaries between art and non-art become almost invisible. A tribal epic can begin its narration from a trivial everyday event; tribal paintings merge with living space as if the two were one and the same. And within the narrative itself, or within the painted imagery, there is no deliberate attempt to follow a sequence. The episodes retold and the images created, take on the apparently chaotic shapes of dreams. In a tribal Ramayan, an episode from the Mahabharata makes a sudden and surprising appearance; tribal paintings contain a curious mixture of traditional and modern imagery. In a way, the syntax of language and the grammar of painting are the same, as if literature were painted words and painting were a song of images.

Yet, it is not safe to assume that the tribal arts do not employ any ordering principles. On the contrary, the ordering principles are very strict. The most important among these is convention. Though the casual spectator may not notice, every tribal performance and creation has at its back another such performance or creation belonging to a previous occasion. The creativity of the tribal artist lies in adhering to the past while at the same time slightly subverting it. The subversions are more playful than ironic.

One of the main characteristics of tribal arts is their distinct manner of constructing space and imagery, which might be described as 'hallucinatory'. In both oral and visual forms of representation, tribal artists seem to interpret verbal and pictorial space as demarcated by an extremely flexible 'frame'. The boundaries between art and non-art become almost invisible. A tribal epic can begin its narration from a trivial everyday event; tribal paintings merge with living space as if the two were one and the same. And within the narrative itself, or within the painted imagery, there is no deliberate attempt to follow a sequence. The episodes retold and the images created, take on the apparently chaotic shapes of dreams. In a tribal Ramayan, an episode from the Mahabharata makes a sudden and surprising appearance; tribal paintings contain a curious mixture of traditional and modern imagery. In a way, the syntax of language and the grammar of painting are the same, as if literature were painted words and painting were a song of images.

Yet, it is not safe to assume that the tribal arts do not employ any ordering principles. On the contrary, the ordering principles are very strict. The most important among these is convention. Though the casual spectator may not notice, every tribal performance and creation has at its back another such performance or creation belonging to a previous occasion. The creativity of the tribal artist lies in adhering to the past while at the same time slightly subverting it. The subversions are more playful than ironic.

One of the main characteristics of tribal arts is their distinct manner of constructing space and imagery, which might be described as 'hallucinatory'. In both oral and visual forms of representation, tribal artists seem to interpret verbal and pictorial space as demarcated by an extremely flexible 'frame'. The boundaries between art and non-art become almost invisible. A tribal epic can begin its narration from a trivial everyday event; tribal paintings merge with living space as if the two were one and the same. And within the narrative itself, or within the painted imagery, there is no deliberate attempt to follow a sequence. The episodes retold and the images created, take on the apparently chaotic shapes of dreams. In a tribal Ramayan, an episode from the Mahabharata makes a sudden and surprising appearance; tribal paintings contain a curious mixture of traditional and modern imagery. In a way, the syntax of language and the grammar of painting are the same, as if literature were painted words and painting were a song of images.

Yet, it is not safe to assume that the tribal arts do not employ any ordering principles. On the contrary, the ordering principles are very strict. The most important among these is convention. Though the casual spectator may not notice, every tribal performance and creation has at its back another such performance or creation belonging to a previous occasion. The creativity of the tribal artist lies in adhering to the past while at the same time slightly subverting it. The subversions are more playful than ironic.

One of the main characteristics of tribal arts is their distinct manner of constructing space and imagery, which might be described as 'hallucinatory'. In both oral and visual forms of representation, tribal artists seem to interpret verbal and pictorial space as demarcated by an extremely flexible 'frame'. The boundaries between art and non-art become almost invisible. A tribal epic can begin its narration from a trivial everyday event; tribal paintings merge with living space as if the two were one and the same. And within the narrative itself, or within the painted imagery, there is no deliberate attempt to follow a sequence. The episodes retold and the images created, take on the apparently chaotic shapes of dreams. In a tribal Ramayan, an episode from the Mahabharata makes a sudden and surprising appearance; tribal paintings contain a curious mixture of traditional and modern imagery. In a way, the syntax of language and the grammar of painting are the same, as if literature were painted words and painting were a song of images.

Yet, it is not safe to assume that the tribal arts do not employ any ordering principles. On the contrary, the ordering principles are very strict. The most important among these is convention. Though the casual spectator may not notice, every tribal performance and creation has at its back another such performance or creation belonging to a previous occasion. The creativity of the tribal artist lies in adhering to the past while at the same time slightly subverting it. The subversions are more playful than ironic.

In modern times, Abraham Lincoln stands as the model of a compassionate statesman. He showed this quality not only in striving for the emancipation of the American blacks, but in the dignity with which he conducted the American Civil War. Lincoln did not fancy himself as a liberator. He thought it would be better for all if emancipation was a gradual process spread over many years. He proposed compensation for slave owners in U.S., bonds and grants for the rehabilitation of the blacks - 'colonisation' as they called it. But fate was to deem otherwise. The haste with which the South wanted to break away from the union with the North, compelled him to move faster than he expected, perhaps more than most men of his time had thought through the issue of slavery. 'We must free the slaves', he said, 'or be ourselves subdued'. 'Before reading, the first draft of Proclamation of Emancipation, he told his colleagues. 'In giving freedom to the slaves, we assure freedom to the free.'

On 22nd September 1862 Lincoln set his hand on the Proclamation of Emancipation declaring that on the first day of January 1863, all persons held as slaves within any state 'shall be then, and forever free.' Lincoln's revolution for slavery left him without any moral indignation or passion against slave owners. The guilt of slave owners, he felt, should be shared by the whole country of North and the South for it seemed to him that everyone in the nation was an accomplice in perpetuating that system. To have whipped up any hatred against slave owners would, to him, have been an act of malice.

In modern times, Abraham Lincoln stands as the model of a compassionate statesman. He showed this quality not only in striving for the emancipation of the American blacks, but in the dignity with which he conducted the American Civil War. Lincoln did not fancy himself as a liberator. He thought it would be better for all if emancipation was a gradual process spread over many years. He proposed compensation for slave owners in U.S., bonds and grants for the rehabilitation of the blacks - 'colonisation' as they called it. But fate was to deem otherwise. The haste with which the South wanted to break away from the union with the North, compelled him to move faster than he expected, perhaps more than most men of his time had thought through the issue of slavery. 'We must free the slaves', he said, 'or be ourselves subdued'. 'Before reading, the first draft of Proclamation of Emancipation, he told his colleagues. 'In giving freedom to the slaves, we assure freedom to the free.'

On 22nd September 1862 Lincoln set his hand on the Proclamation of Emancipation declaring that on the first day of January 1863, all persons held as slaves within any state 'shall be then, and forever free.' Lincoln's revolution for slavery left him without any moral indignation or passion against slave owners. The guilt of slave owners, he felt, should be shared by the whole country of North and the South for it seemed to him that everyone in the nation was an accomplice in perpetuating that system. To have whipped up any hatred against slave owners would, to him, have been an act of malice.

In modern times, Abraham Lincoln stands as the model of a compassionate statesman. He showed this quality not only in striving for the emancipation of the American blacks, but in the dignity with which he conducted the American Civil War. Lincoln did not fancy himself as a liberator. He thought it would be better for all if emancipation was a gradual process spread over many years. He proposed compensation for slave owners in U.S., bonds and grants for the rehabilitation of the blacks - 'colonisation' as they called it. But fate was to deem otherwise. The haste with which the South wanted to break away from the union with the North, compelled him to move faster than he expected, perhaps more than most men of his time had thought through the issue of slavery. 'We must free the slaves', he said, 'or be ourselves subdued'. 'Before reading, the first draft of Proclamation of Emancipation, he told his colleagues. 'In giving freedom to the slaves, we assure freedom to the free.'

On 22nd September 1862 Lincoln set his hand on the Proclamation of Emancipation declaring that on the first day of January 1863, all persons held as slaves within any state 'shall be then, and forever free.' Lincoln's revolution for slavery left him without any moral indignation or passion against slave owners. The guilt of slave owners, he felt, should be shared by the whole country of North and the South for it seemed to him that everyone in the nation was an accomplice in perpetuating that system. To have whipped up any hatred against slave owners would, to him, have been an act of malice.

In modern times, Abraham Lincoln stands as the model of a compassionate statesman. He showed this quality not only in striving for the emancipation of the American blacks, but in the dignity with which he conducted the American Civil War. Lincoln did not fancy himself as a liberator. He thought it would be better for all if emancipation was a gradual process spread over many years. He proposed compensation for slave owners in U.S., bonds and grants for the rehabilitation of the blacks - 'colonisation' as they called it. But fate was to deem otherwise. The haste with which the South wanted to break away from the union with the North, compelled him to move faster than he expected, perhaps more than most men of his time had thought through the issue of slavery. 'We must free the slaves', he said, 'or be ourselves subdued'. 'Before reading, the first draft of Proclamation of Emancipation, he told his colleagues. 'In giving freedom to the slaves, we assure freedom to the free.'

On 22nd September 1862 Lincoln set his hand on the Proclamation of Emancipation declaring that on the first day of January 1863, all persons held as slaves within any state 'shall be then, and forever free.' Lincoln's revolution for slavery left him without any moral indignation or passion against slave owners. The guilt of slave owners, he felt, should be shared by the whole country of North and the South for it seemed to him that everyone in the nation was an accomplice in perpetuating that system. To have whipped up any hatred against slave owners would, to him, have been an act of malice.

In modern times, Abraham Lincoln stands as the model of a compassionate statesman. He showed this quality not only in striving for the emancipation of the American blacks, but in the dignity with which he conducted the American Civil War. Lincoln did not fancy himself as a liberator. He thought it would be better for all if emancipation was a gradual process spread over many years. He proposed compensation for slave owners in U.S., bonds and grants for the rehabilitation of the blacks - 'colonisation' as they called it. But fate was to deem otherwise. The haste with which the South wanted to break away from the union with the North, compelled him to move faster than he expected, perhaps more than most men of his time had thought through the issue of slavery. 'We must free the slaves', he said, 'or be ourselves subdued'. 'Before reading, the first draft of Proclamation of Emancipation, he told his colleagues. 'In giving freedom to the slaves, we assure freedom to the free.'

On 22nd September 1862 Lincoln set his hand on the Proclamation of Emancipation declaring that on the first day of January 1863, all persons held as slaves within any state 'shall be then, and forever free.' Lincoln's revolution for slavery left him without any moral indignation or passion against slave owners. The guilt of slave owners, he felt, should be shared by the whole country of North and the South for it seemed to him that everyone in the nation was an accomplice in perpetuating that system. To have whipped up any hatred against slave owners would, to him, have been an act of malice.