The Boy Who Broke the Bank – Contextual Q&A
Question 1
"Nathu was the sweeper at the Pipalnagar Bank. He was sweeping the steps of the bank with a small broom, raising a lot of dust. It was the twentieth of the month, and he hadn't received his wages for the month. He had asked for a raise nine months ago and had never received one either. He was not satisfied with his small salary, which was paid irregularly, and he was determined to leave the job as soon as he got his salary."
(i) What is Nathu's job at the bank? (3)
(ii) Why is Nathu sweeping angrily despite it being the twentieth of the month? (3)
(iii) What promises had been made to Nathu nine months earlier? (3)
(iv) What does Nathu's determination to leave reveal about his character? (3)
(v) How does this opening passage establish the catalyst for the story's chain of events? (4)
Answer:
(i) Nathu is the sweeper boy at Pipalnagar Bank, responsible for cleaning and maintaining the bank's premises, including sweeping the steps.
(ii) Nathu is sweeping angrily because despite it being the twentieth of the month, he has not received his wages. His anger stems from financial insecurity and the bank's failure to pay him on time. The physical action of sweeping with intensity reflects his emotional frustration and discontent.
(iii) Nine months earlier, Nathu had been promised a raise of five rupees every six months. This promise has not been fulfilled, adding to his disappointment and sense of being exploited by the bank.
(iv) Nathu's determination to leave reveals that he is not passive about his mistreatment. Despite being in a vulnerable position as a poor sweeper, he asserts agency by deciding to quit once he receives his salary. His determination shows self-respect and unwillingness to accept indefinite exploitation, though his limited options prevent him from leaving immediately.
(v) This opening passage establishes Nathu's legitimate grievance as the seed that will grow into an enormous rumor. His complaint about unpaid wages, while justified, becomes the starting point for a chain reaction of miscommunication and exaggeration that leads to the bank's collapse. The passage suggests that small discontents, when spread through gossip, can have catastrophic consequences.
Question 2
"Sitaram, who was on his way to deliver freshly ironed clothes, stopped to chat with Nathu. 'Why are you looking so angry today, Nathu?' he asked. Nathu replied bitterly: 'The bank hasn't paid my salary. It's the twentieth. I've decided to look for another job. I'll leave as soon as I get my salary.' Sitaram listened carefully and thought he could help. He decided to tell Mrs. Srivastava, a wealthy lady of the town, that Nathu wouldn't be sweeping the bank courtyard anymore because the bank couldn't pay him."
(i) Who is Sitaram and what is he doing when he meets Nathu? (3)
(ii) What distortion does Sitaram introduce in Nathu's complaint? (3)
(iii) What is Sitaram's motive in spreading this information? (3)
(iv) How does Sitaram's action demonstrate the danger of misrepresentation? (3)
(v) How does this passage illustrate the beginning of the rumor chain? (4)
Answer:
(i) Sitaram is the son of a washerman who is delivering freshly ironed clothes to customers throughout the town when he encounters Nathu. He is in the middle of his daily work routine when he stops to chat with the frustrated sweeper.
(ii) Sitaram distorts Nathu's complaint significantly. Nathu's statement is about his unpaid salary and his intention to leave. Sitaram transforms this into a statement about the bank being unable to pay its employees—a fundamental difference. He suggests the bank's financial inability rather than simple mismanagement or delayed payment.
(iii) Sitaram's motive appears well-intentioned but misguided. He believes he can help Nathu by informing Mrs. Srivastava that a sweeper position will soon be available. However, his attempt to create a job opportunity for Nathu inadvertently spreads false information about the bank's financial status.
(iv) Sitaram's action demonstrates how even innocent misrepresentation can cause serious harm. His reframing of facts—changing "the bank hasn't paid him" to "the bank can't pay its employees"—introduces a crucial falsehood that will spiral into panic. The passage shows how communication can be distorted not through malice but through misunderstanding or reinterpretation.
(v) This passage is crucial because it marks the moment when a legitimate personal complaint is transformed into a rumor about institutional failure. Sitaram's conversation with Mrs. Srivastava becomes the first link in a chain of communication that will grow more exaggerated with each retelling, eventually causing the bank's collapse. The passage shows how rumors begin not with deliberate lies but with subtle shifts in how information is presented.
Question 3
"When the news spread that the bank was on the verge of collapse, Old Ganpat, who had been sitting on the pavement for years with a crooked leg, calling for alms and never known to walk, astonished everyone by suddenly leaping to his feet and actually running in the direction of the bank. People watched in amazement as the beggar who had been immobilized for so long rushed to join the growing crowd at the bank."
(i) What is Old Ganpat's usual condition? (3)
(ii) What does Ganpat's sudden ability to run reveal? (3)
(iii) What is ironic about Ganpat rushing to the bank? (3)
(iv) What does this incident suggest about human behavior during panic? (3)
(v) How does Ganpat's character illuminate Bond's critique in the story? (4)
Answer:
Question 4
"The manager of the bank was in a state of dilemma. He knew the bank had sufficient reserves to meet all withdrawals, but they didn't have ready cash. He stood at the counter with sweat on his brow and addressed the angry mob: 'We have reserves, but we don't have ready cash just now. I urge you to go home and come back tomorrow.' But the crowd shouted: 'We want it now! Now! Now!' And a brick hurtled through the air and crashed through the window."
(i) What is the bank manager's dilemma? (3)
(ii) What is the difference between having "reserves" and "ready cash"? (3)
(iii) Why does the manager's explanation fail to calm the crowd? (3)
(iv) What does "We want it now! Now! Now!" reveal about the crowd's mental state? (3)
(v) How does this passage demonstrate the ultimate consequences of the spreading rumor? (4)
Answer:
(i) The manager knows that the bank is actually financially sound with sufficient reserves to cover all withdrawals. However, he faces an impossible situation: the bank doesn't have enough liquid cash on hand to meet the sudden, panic-driven demands of the entire town. He is trapped between a factual truth (the bank is solvent) and a practical reality (he cannot immediately satisfy the panicked crowd).
(ii) Reserves are money the bank has available in various forms (investments, securities, long-term assets) but cannot immediately convert to cash. Ready cash is money in physical form, immediately available for withdrawal. The manager is explaining that the bank's assets are sufficient but cannot be instantly liquidated.
(iii) The manager's rational, factual explanation fails because the crowd is driven by panic and irrational fear, not logic. They don't trust the manager's reassurances; they want tangible, immediate proof in the form of cash. In a state of panic, people respond to emotion, not explanation. The manager's plea to return the next day is perceived as a delaying tactic that confirms their worst fears.
(iv) "We want it now! Now! Now!" reveals that the crowd has abandoned rational thought and entered a state of collective hysteria. The repetition and urgency indicate desperation, fear, and unwillingness to listen to reason. The crowd has become a unified force driven by survival instinct and panic rather than individual judgment.
(v) This passage represents the culmination of the rumor's destructive power. What began as a misunderstanding about Nathu's unpaid salary has escalated to the point where an actually solvent bank is destroyed by panic withdrawal. The rumor itself causes the very financial catastrophe it falsely predicted. The passage demonstrates that perception becomes reality: whether or not the bank was actually failing is irrelevant—the belief that it was failing creates the conditions for its collapse.
Question 5
"The next morning Nathu came to sweep the steps of the bank as usual. When he saw the broken glass and stones cluttering the steps, he raised his hands in a gesture of shock and surprise. 'Who would have thought the bank would collapse!' he said to himself, and looked thoughtfully into the distance. 'I wonder how it could have happened. Who could have done this?' He didn't know that it was his innocent remark that had set everything in motion."
(i) What does Nathu find when he arrives at the bank? (3)
(ii) What is significant about Nathu's ignorance of the actual events? (3)
(iii) Why does Bond emphasize that Nathu's remark was "innocent"? (3)
(iv) What does Nathu's confusion reveal about his social position? (3)
(v) How does this ending encapsulate the story's central message about rumors and consequences? (4)