These concepts set up the comparison between the skillsets of the two singing animals, and that basis will be the driving force for all of the stanzas to come. Rather than throw things, they drew closer, “enraptured” by her voice.
So thrilled were the animals with that song that they “clapped,” “wept,” and “cheered” in reaction. The nightingale, however, sang so well that the other animals loved to hear it, and even the frog “umbstruck sat” while the “melody” floated to his ears.
This concept is solidified in the notion that the other animals fought against the process with “stones” and “sticks,” which indicates that they were literally throwing things to silence the frog, but the frog sang on without consideration. Rather, his singing was inflicted on the other animals despite their preferences to not hear it. Even though no animal except for the frog wanted to hear, the frog kept on singing his “crass cacophony” with confidence that he, by the account, had not earned. In fact, “ther creatures loathed his voice,” but the frog refused to cater to their preferences at all. The first stanza deals solely with the frog’s knack for performing-or lack thereof-in that he “roaked away” until “dawn,” despite the nearby animals not caring for his singing. The Frog and the Nightingale Analysis First, Second and Third Stanza That moral is to have confidence and grounding, because, without those things, even the most talented of people could be doomed to failure and disaster. These concepts can be linked to human nature in a way that offers a moral to readers. Essentially, the nightingale did not approach her skill with confidence and independence, and because of this, the lesser-talented frog was able to take advantage of the nightingale, ruin the nightingale’s gift, and cause all animals within the vicinity to lose something they enjoyed in favor of something they never appreciated.
Though the nightingale’s singing is clearly preferred by the other animals listening to the pair, the naivety of the nightingale allows the frog-who is “crass” and “bitter”-to manipulate the nightingale into misery through the very thing that the nightingale loved. One is a frog, and the other is a nightingale. The terrain and the prevailing hostilities are frightening, as fighting between the original inhabitants of the land and its colonizers plays out in what is now known as 'The Black War.' Clare and Billy are hostile towards each other from the outset, both suffering their own traumas and mutual distrust, but as their journey leads them deeper into the wilderness, they must learn to find empathy for one another, while weighing the true cost of revenge.‘The Frog and the Nightingale’ by Vikram Seth utilizes its stanzas and rhyme scheme to portray a fictional story of two animals who sing.
Unable to find compatriots for her journey, she is forced to enlist the help of a young Aboriginal tracker Billy (Baykali Ganambarr) who grudgingly takes her through the rugged wilderness to track down Hawkins. When British authorities fail to deliver justice, Clare decides to pursue Hawkins, who leaves his post suddenly to secure a captaincy up north. Clare's husband Aidan (Michael Sheasby) retaliates and she becomes the victim of a harrowing crime at the hands of the lieutenant and his cronies.
#THE NIGHTINGALE FREE#
Having served her 7-year sentence, she is desperate to be free of her abusive master, Lieutenant Hawkins (Sam Claflin) who refuses to release her from his charge. Set during the colonization of Australia in 1825, the film follows Clare (Aisling Franciosi), a 21-year-old Irish convict. THE NIGHTINGALE is a meditation on the consequences of violence and the price of seeking vengeance.